ArticlePloS one2026
Oral step-down vs full-course intravenous antibiotic therapy for infective endocarditis: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfective endocarditis (IE) is a life-threatening condition traditionally managed with prolonged intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. However, sequential oral antibiotic therapy has emerged as a promising alternative in selected patients, potentially reducing hospital stay, adverse events, and healthcare costs. While the POET trial demonstrated non-inferiority of oral step-down therapy in a narrow subset of patients with left-sided IE, broader applicability remains uncertain. Observational studies and recent meta-analyses have yielded heterogeneous and inconclusive results, underscoring the need for a comprehensive synthesis of current evidence.
methodsThis protocol outlines the methodology for a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness and safety of sequential oral antibiotic therapy versus full-course IV therapy in adult patients with bacterial IE. We will include randomized controlled trials and observational comparative studies enrolling adults diagnosed with IE by Duke criteria, clinical judgment, or histopathological confirmation. The primary outcomes are all-cause mortality and clinical cure; secondary outcomes include relapse, unplanned cardiac surgery, embolic events, hospital length of stay, and adverse events. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and LILACS, with no restrictions on publication date or language. Risk of bias will be assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Data synthesis will follow Cochrane guidelines, and certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the GRADE approach. DISCUSSION: This review will provide a rigorous and up-to-date synthesis of the evidence on oral step-down therapy in IE, addressing populations underrepresented in prior trials. The findings will inform clinical decision-making, guideline development, and future research on optimizing antibiotic strategies for IE. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD420251104423.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.