ArticleInfection2026
Effectiveness and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam plus aztreonam vs. cefiderocol for infections due to ceftazidime-avibactam-resistant Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a single-center cohort study.
Article 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeResistance to ceftazidime-avibactam (C/A) among Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa limits treatment options. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of C/A plus aztreonam versus cefiderocol for C/A-resistant infections.
methodsThis retrospective, single-center cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in the United Arab Emirates between April 1, 2022, and November 30, 2025. Eligible patients were hospitalized adults with microbiologically confirmed infections caused by C/A-resistant Enterobacterales or P. aeruginosa who received C/A plus aztreonam or cefiderocol for ≥ 48 h. The main outcomes were in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and clinical cure. Additional microbiological and safety outcomes were also assessed.
resultsFifty-six patients were included, of whom 36 received C/A plus aztreonam and 20 received cefiderocol. The median age was 65 years, and 51.8% were admitted to the intensive care unit. P. aeruginosa and Klebsiella spp. were the most common targeted pathogens. No statistically significant differences were observed between treatment groups in rates of in-hospital mortality (38.9% vs. 30.0%; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.21-2.17), 30-day mortality (22.2% vs. 25.0%; OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.32-4.20), or clinical cure (61.1% vs. 60.0%; OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.31-2.92). Pathogen-stratified analyses were consistent with the overall findings, with no significant between-group differences within either pathogen group. Microbiological and safety outcomes were also comparable.
conclusionsNo significant differences in clinical outcomes were observed between C/A plus aztreonam and cefiderocol for C/A-resistant Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa infections, but wide confidence intervals limited certainty. Larger molecularly characterized studies are needed to guide treatment selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42640404What 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.