ReviewInfection2026
Combination antibiotic therapy in Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: evidence, controversies, and future directions.
Review 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Staphylococcus aureus is now the leading cause of infective endocarditis (IE) worldwide and is associated with high mortality and frequent complications. Combination antimicrobial therapy has long been proposed to enhance bactericidal activity, improve biofilm penetration, and limit resistance; however, its true clinical value remains uncertain. This narrative review examines the experimental and clinical evidence for combination regimens in Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis (S. aureus IE). We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library through September 2025 for randomised trials, comparative observational studies, major guidelines, and key experimental reports. Evidence is synthesised across methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant strains, and across native and prosthetic valve disease. We summarise the biological rationale, potential benefits, and stewardship impact of combination therapy. We also highlight the practical implications for when to consider, avoid, or de-escalate combination therapy, and outline priorities for future research. We find that evidence for combination therapy in S. aureus endocarditis remains limited and largely observational. Adjunctive rifampin and aminoglycosides have not shown consistent clinical benefit and are associated with increased toxicity. Beta-lactam combinations with vancomycin or daptomycin may reduce the bacteremia duration, but this has not translated into improved survival. Emerging regimens, particularly daptomycin combined with ceftaroline show promise in persistent bacteremia, although evidence remains observational. Overall, current data do not support routine use of combination therapy and favour a selective, case-based approach. High-quality multicentre studies integrating microbiological, pharmacodynamic, and clinical endpoints are urgently needed to define optimal combination strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42149364What 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.