Trial reportPostgraduate medical journal1983
Metronidazole v. cefoxitin in severe appendicitis--a trial to compare a single intraoperative dose of two antibiotics given intravenously.
Trial report in Postgraduate medical journal, 1983. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of polymicrobial infections.Intensive care medicine · 1994Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In severe appendicitis, the effect of a single intravenous dose of metronidazole (500 mg) was compared with cefoxitin (1 g). The antibiotics were given by random allocation once the diagnosis had been established at operation. In the metronidazole group, 5 out of 48 patients developed a wound infection whilst in hospital compared with 13 out of 48 in the cefoxitin group (P = 0.036). However, 57% of wound infections became apparent after the patient went home and the overall infection rates were similar. The mean length of postoperative hospital stay was 5.0 days in the metronidazole group and 6.8 days in the cefoxitin group (P = 0.052), but of those who did develop a wound infection, the length of stay was almost double in the cefoxitin group. Anaerobic organisms were cultured from the wound in 7 out of 15 patients who received cefoxitin but in none of 5 patients in the metronidazole group. Whilst metronidazole only delayed the discharge of pus from the wound, it did seem to reduce the severity of infection. Cefoxitin appeared to be less effective, given as a single intravenous injection at a dose of 1 g.
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.