SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Piperacillin-tazobactam versus cefepime monotherapy in pediatric patients with febrile neutropenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of pediatrics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether piperacillin-tazobactam therapy, compared with cefepime monotherapy, results in significant difference in treatment success, mortality, and duration outcomes in pediatric patients with febrile neutropenia (FN). A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched up to February 3. No starting limits for dates were used. We only included studies of pediatric patients with FN comparing piperacillin-tazobactam to cefepime monotherapy. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD). Five RCTs involving 470 episodes were included. The pooled analysis for treatment success showed no statistically significant difference between groups (RR = 1.02; 95% CI [0.89; 1.18]; P = 0.76) with low heterogeneity (I
conclusionNo statistically significant difference was found in treatment success or mortality between the groups. Patients receiving cefepime had a treatment duration 0.9 days shorter than those receiving piperacillin-tazobactam, although this finding should be interpreted with caution. The available evidence remains limited. Further RCTs are needed to elucidate potential differences in treatment success, mortality, and duration between the drugs. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD420261296621). WHAT IS KNOWN: • Cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam are widely utilized as empirical monotherapy for febrile neutropenia, but evidence regarding their comparative clinical efficacy and safety in children remains inconclusive. WHAT IS NEW: • This meta-analysis quantifies differences in treatment success, mortality and duration of treatment outcomes in pediatric patients with febrile neutropenia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42096109What 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.