ArticlePloS one2026
Clinical efficacy of empiric antibiotic therapy in Chinese patients with cirrhosis and bacterial infections: A multicenter study.
Article in PloS one, 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
41 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsBacterial and fungal infections are major drivers of acute decompensation and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) in cirrhosis, but real-world data on the effectiveness of empiric antibiotic therapy in China are scarce. We evaluated clinical response to empiric antibiotics, identified predictors of non-response, and assessed the impact of response and secondary infection on short-term outcomes in Chinese patients with cirrhosis. APPROACH &
resultsIn this multicenter retrospective cohort from 24 tertiary centers, 1,401 adults with cirrhosis and bacterial or fungal infections were included. Clinical response to first-line empiric therapy occurred in 913 patients (65%). Non-responders had higher MELD/MELD-Na scores, more organ failures and ACLF, and more intense systemic inflammation. In multivariable models, greater ACLF grade 2-3, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, bilirubin, culture positivity, and lower albumin and mean arterial pressure independently predicted non-response. Non-response was independently associated with 28-day and 90-day mortality (HR 4.20 and 3.16, respectively), with consistent findings in time-dependent and center-clustered sensitivity analyses. Secondary infection developed in 7.0% of patients, was four-fold more frequent in non-responders (13.9% vs 3.3%), and nearly doubled 90-day mortality, whereas microbiological features at secondary infection did not clearly distinguish second-course responders from non-responders. Comparative analyses revealed substantial center-to-center and China-global differences in etiology, infection profile, and multidrug-resistant (MDR) burden.
conclusionsIn Chinese patients with cirrhosis, lack of early clinical response to empiric antibiotics independently predicts short-term mortality and is associated with a higher risk of clinically distinct secondary infection. Our findings support risk-adapted, locally informed empiric strategies.
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.