SynthesisThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2026
Systematic review and meta-analysis to identify meropenem exposures and pharmacological targets predictive of clinical outcomes.
Synthesis in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMeropenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem reserved for severe infections. Pharmacokinetic variability has been observed in meropenem patients, and its optimal pharmacological target remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluated meropenem exposure, target attainment, and their association with clinical outcomes to clarify effective pharmacological targets.
methodsFollowing PRISMA (PROSPERO CRD42024499652), studies were identified that measured meropenem concentrations in patient samples and reported clinical outcomes. Studies were synthesized and predictors for clinical outcomes were identified by meta-analysis. Patient-level data, provided by authors, were analysed by multivariate logistic regression to identify predictors for clinical outcomes.
resultsIn total, 42 studies were included, comprising 2264 patients. Most studies had a high risk of bias in this context. Pooled clinical cure was 70.0% and 30-day mortality 22.2%. Meropenem concentration was not associated with clinical cure (OR 1.01 per mg/L, 95% CI 0.97-1.05, P = 0.702), whereas attaining 100%ƒT > MIC was marginally associated with cure (OR 1.02 per 1%, 1.00-1.04, P = 0.0552). Higher meropenem exposure was associated with increased 30-day mortality (OR 1.064 per mg/L, 1.008-1.124, P = 0.025). In patient-level analysis (six studies, 295 patients), meropenem exposure, SOFA score and age were each independently associated with mortality. DISCUSSION: Higher meropenem concentrations were associated with increased mortality across both cohort and patient-level analyses, challenging the assumption that universally higher dosing benefits all patients. However, residual confounding by illness severity could not be excluded, thus this finding should be considered hypothesis generating. Attaining 100%ƒT > MIC may improve cure while avoiding excessive concentrations may reduce harm, further research into meropenem personalized dosing is required.
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.