ArticleAllergologie select2026
Cefazolin as an alternative in patients with a history of penicillin or β-lactam antibiotic allergy: A case overview.
Article in Allergologie select, 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
Many patients with suspected or confirmed allergy to penicillin or β-lactam antibiotics are unnecessarily denied all β-lactam antibiotics (BLA) and instead given a less effective antibiotic with more side effects. However, cefazolin, a first-generation cephalosporin, is a safe and effective treatment option for these patients in most cases. Recent studies show that immunological cross-reactions among BLAs are primarily caused by structural similarities in the side chains and not by the common β-lactam ring. Cefazolin has unique R1 and R2 side chains that largely rule out cross-reactivity with other BLAs. In a case series, 21 patients with a history of alleged or confirmed allergy to BLAs were exposed to cefazolin under real-life conditions, and all but 1 patient (who developed an uncomplicated maculopapular rash) showed no reaction. Therefore, the use of cefazolin is acceptable under clinical supervision in cases of a previous uncomplicated delayed-type reaction. However, in cases of reported or documented clinical reactions to BLA that are indicative of a type I allergy (such as urticaria, angioedema, anaphylaxis), prior to (titrated) administration of cefazolin under appropriate monitoring measures, a diagnostic evaluation in accordance with guidelines, including a negative skin test for cefazolin, is advisable. This procedure avoids the use of less suitable reserve antibiotics and ensures effective treatment without incalculable risk for anaphylaxis.
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.