ArticleInfection2026
Evaluation of the B-lactam antibiotic concentration in the early phase of treatment of patients with suspected sepsis at the emergency department.
Article in Infection, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEarly administration of beta-lactam antibiotics is a crucial part in the treatment of sepsis and septic shock. Beta-lactams demonstrate time-dependent killing and therefore it is important to optimize the time above the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC). An extra dose is recommended in threatening/suspected/confirmed septic shock. This study aimed to examine whether patients with suspected sepsis achieved adequate concentrations after the initial dose.
methodsA prospective observational study was conducted in patients with suspected sepsis at the emergency department, started on cefotaxime, piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem. The primary endpoint was defined as trough serum concentration above EUCAST clinical breakpoints for Enterobacterales spp., during the whole dosing interval, 100% ƒT > MIC. Primary objective was the percentage of patients reaching 100% ƒT > MIC. Secondary objectives were how an eventual extra dose and patients related factors affected target attainment.
resultsThe study included 60 patients with a median age of 78 years. Of all patients, 73% (44/60) attained 100% ƒT > MIC. Nine patients received an extra dose of whom all attained target. Patients not attaining target were younger with median age (years) 68 vs 79 and had better renal function in terms of median creatinine (µmol/l) 74 vs 121 and median eGFR (mL/min) 84 vs 49.
conclusionIn this study, 27% (16/60) of patients admitted to the emergency department with suspected sepsis did not meet the target of 100% ƒT > MIC. This suggests that the treatment regimens for patients admitted to the emergency department with suspected sepsis can be further improved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41893986What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.