Observational studyAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2026
Efficacy and safety of intravenous combined with aerosolized colistimethate sodium for carbapenem-resistant organism-induced pneumonia: a retrospective study.
Observational study in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPolymyxins are regarded as the last-resort antibiotics for treating resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Colistimethate sodium (CMS) is commonly used for carbapenem-resistant organism (CRO)-induced pulmonary infection. However, the polycationic/hydrophilic structure of intravenous injection (IV-CMS) limits its penetration into lung parenchyma, whereas aerosol inhalation (AER-CMS) has high alveolar penetration and minimal systemic dispersion. Currently, post-marketing monitoring of the clinical efficacy and safety of IV + AER CMS is limited. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IV + AER CMS (Tianyun
methodsThis is a multi-center retrospective study. Patients with CRO-induced pulmonary infection who received IV + AER CMS/IV-CMS alone between 2021 and 2023 were enrolled. The primary endpoint was clinical response rate, and secondary endpoints included clinical cure rate, length of stay, mortality, and incidence of adverse events (pigmentation, hypersensitivity, renal toxicity, neurotoxicity, and bronchospasm).
resultsThere were 101 patients in IV + AER CMS group and 108 patients in IV-CMS group. The clinical response rate in IV + AER CMS group was significantly higher than that in IV-CMS group (78.57% vs. 60.00%, p = 0.017). There were no significant differences in clinical cure rate, length of stay and 28-day all-cause mortality between two groups. No significant differences in the incidence of adverse events were observed between two groups.
conclusionsThe clinical response rate of IV + AER CMS for CRO-induced pulmonary infection is higher than that of IV-CMS and no increased risk of renal toxicity, demonstrating good tolerability of AER-CMS in clinical practice.
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.