Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Infection 4/2022

20-05-2022 | Soft Tissue Infection | Review

The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Krishan Yadav, Natalia Krzyzaniak, Charlotte Alexander, Anna Mae Scott, Justin Clark, Paul Glasziou, Gerben Keijzers

Published in: Infection | Issue 4/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Antibiotic treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis is highly variable with respect to agent, dose, and route of administration. As there is uncertainty about optimal/appropriate time to reassess, we aimed to assess time to clinical response.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials reporting clinical response of uncomplicated cellulitis to antibiotic treatment over multiple timepoints. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to June 2021 without language restrictions. The primary outcome was time to clinical response. Other outcomes were components of clinical response (pain, severity score, redness, edema measured at ≥ 2 timepoints) and the proportion of patients with treatment failure. We performed a pooled estimate of the average time to clinical response together with 95% confidence intervals using a random effects model.

Results

We included 32 randomized controlled trials (n = 13,576 participants). The mean time to clinical response was 1.68 days (95%CI 1.48–1.88; I2 = 76%). The response to treatment for specific components was as follows: ~ 50% reduction of pain and severity score by day 5, a ~ 33% reduction in area of redness by day 2–3, and a 30–50% reduction of proportion of patients with edema by day 2–4. Treatment failure was variably defined with an overall failure rate of 12% (95%CI 9–16%).

Conclusion

The best available data suggest the optimal time to clinical reassessment is between 2 and 4 days, but this must be interpreted with caution due to considerable heterogeneity and small number of included studies.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Pallin DJ, Egan DJ, Pelletier AJ, et al. Increased US emergency department visits for skin and soft tissue infections, and changes in antibiotic choices, during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51:291–8.PubMedCrossRef Pallin DJ, Egan DJ, Pelletier AJ, et al. Increased US emergency department visits for skin and soft tissue infections, and changes in antibiotic choices, during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51:291–8.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Stenstrom R, Grafstein E, Romney M, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infection in a Canadian emergency department. CJEM. 2009;11:430–8.PubMedCrossRef Stenstrom R, Grafstein E, Romney M, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infection in a Canadian emergency department. CJEM. 2009;11:430–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Aboltins CA, Hutchinson AF, Sinnappu RN, et al. Oral versus parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of cellulitis: a randomized non-inferiority trial. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:581–6.PubMedCrossRef Aboltins CA, Hutchinson AF, Sinnappu RN, et al. Oral versus parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of cellulitis: a randomized non-inferiority trial. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:581–6.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bernard P, Chosidow O, Vaillant L. Oral pristinamycin versus standard penicillin regimen to treat erysipelas in adults: randomised, non-inferiority, open trial. BMJ. 2002;325:864.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Bernard P, Chosidow O, Vaillant L. Oral pristinamycin versus standard penicillin regimen to treat erysipelas in adults: randomised, non-inferiority, open trial. BMJ. 2002;325:864.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:e10-52.PubMedCrossRef Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:e10-52.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Yadav K, Gatien M, Corrales-Medina V, et al. Antimicrobial treatment decision for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections in the emergency department. CJEM. 2017;19:175–80.PubMedCrossRef Yadav K, Gatien M, Corrales-Medina V, et al. Antimicrobial treatment decision for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections in the emergency department. CJEM. 2017;19:175–80.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Hamill LM, Thi YE, Keijzers G. Picking the low-hanging fruit: why not choose oral antibiotics for skin and soft-tissue infections in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2019;31:1119–22.PubMedCrossRef Hamill LM, Thi YE, Keijzers G. Picking the low-hanging fruit: why not choose oral antibiotics for skin and soft-tissue infections in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2019;31:1119–22.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Yadav K, Nath A, Suh KN, et al. Treatment failure definitions for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review. Infection. 2020;48:75–83.PubMedCrossRef Yadav K, Nath A, Suh KN, et al. Treatment failure definitions for non-purulent skin and soft tissue infections: a systematic review. Infection. 2020;48:75–83.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Moran GJ, Krishnadasan A, Mower WR, et al. Effect of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole vs cephalexin alone on clinical cure of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:2088–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Moran GJ, Krishnadasan A, Mower WR, et al. Effect of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole vs cephalexin alone on clinical cure of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:2088–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Cross ELA, Jordan H, Godfrey R, et al. Route and duration of antibiotic therapy in acute cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and harms of antibiotic treatment. J Infect. 2020;81:521–31.PubMedCrossRef Cross ELA, Jordan H, Godfrey R, et al. Route and duration of antibiotic therapy in acute cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and harms of antibiotic treatment. J Infect. 2020;81:521–31.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Thomas KS, Brindle R, Chalmers JR, et al. Identifying priority areas for research into the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cellulitis (erysipelas): results of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:541–3.PubMedCrossRef Thomas KS, Brindle R, Chalmers JR, et al. Identifying priority areas for research into the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cellulitis (erysipelas): results of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:541–3.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339: b2535.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339: b2535.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Clark JM, Sanders S, Carter M, et al. Improving the translation of search strategies using the Polyglot Search Translator: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020;108:195–207.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Clark JM, Sanders S, Carter M, et al. Improving the translation of search strategies using the Polyglot Search Translator: a randomized controlled trial. J Med Libr Assoc. 2020;108:195–207.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Marshall IJ, Noel-Storr A, Kuiper J, et al. Machine learning for identifying Randomized Controlled Trials: an evaluation and practitioner’s guide. Res Synth Methods. 2018;9:602–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Marshall IJ, Noel-Storr A, Kuiper J, et al. Machine learning for identifying Randomized Controlled Trials: an evaluation and practitioner’s guide. Res Synth Methods. 2018;9:602–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic review of interventions. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2019.CrossRef Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic review of interventions. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2019.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Bucko AD, Hunt BJ, Kidd SL, et al. Randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of oral cefditoren 200 or 400 mg BID with either cefuroxime 250 mg BID or cefadroxil 500 mg BID for the treatment of uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections. Clin Ther. 2002;24:1134–47.PubMedCrossRef Bucko AD, Hunt BJ, Kidd SL, et al. Randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of oral cefditoren 200 or 400 mg BID with either cefuroxime 250 mg BID or cefadroxil 500 mg BID for the treatment of uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections. Clin Ther. 2002;24:1134–47.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Hepburn MJ, Dooley DP, Skidmore PJ, et al. Comparison of short-course (5 days) and standard (10 days) treatment for uncomplicated cellulitis. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1669–74.PubMedCrossRef Hepburn MJ, Dooley DP, Skidmore PJ, et al. Comparison of short-course (5 days) and standard (10 days) treatment for uncomplicated cellulitis. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1669–74.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Huang DB, O’Riordan W, Overcash JS, et al. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous iclaprim vs vancomycin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens: REVIVE-1. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66:1222–9.PubMedCrossRef Huang DB, O’Riordan W, Overcash JS, et al. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous iclaprim vs vancomycin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens: REVIVE-1. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66:1222–9.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kingsley J, Mehra P, Lawrence LE, et al. A randomized, double-blind, Phase 2 study to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections treated with delafloxacin, linezolid or vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71:821–9.PubMedCrossRef Kingsley J, Mehra P, Lawrence LE, et al. A randomized, double-blind, Phase 2 study to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections treated with delafloxacin, linezolid or vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71:821–9.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Lipsky BA, Yarbrough DR 3rd, Walker FBT, et al. Ofloxacin versus cephalexin for treating skin and soft tissue infections. Int J Dermatol. 1992;31:443–5.PubMedCrossRef Lipsky BA, Yarbrough DR 3rd, Walker FBT, et al. Ofloxacin versus cephalexin for treating skin and soft tissue infections. Int J Dermatol. 1992;31:443–5.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Lodise TP, Redell M, Armstrong SO, et al. Efficacy and safety of oritavancin relative to vancomycin for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) in the outpatient setting: results from the SOLO clinical trials. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4:ofw274.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Lodise TP, Redell M, Armstrong SO, et al. Efficacy and safety of oritavancin relative to vancomycin for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) in the outpatient setting: results from the SOLO clinical trials. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4:ofw274.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
go back to reference O’Riordan W, Cardenas C, Shin E, et al. Once-daily oral omadacycline versus twice-daily oral linezolid for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (OASIS-2): a phase 3, double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:1080–90.PubMedCrossRef O’Riordan W, Cardenas C, Shin E, et al. Once-daily oral omadacycline versus twice-daily oral linezolid for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (OASIS-2): a phase 3, double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:1080–90.PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Pallin DJ, Binder WD, Allen MB, et al. Clinical trial: comparative effectiveness of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus cephalexin alone for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1754–62.PubMedCrossRef Pallin DJ, Binder WD, Allen MB, et al. Clinical trial: comparative effectiveness of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus cephalexin alone for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1754–62.PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Pullman J, Gardovskis J, Farley B, et al. Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:3471–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Pullman J, Gardovskis J, Farley B, et al. Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:3471–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Tack KJ, Littlejohn TW, Mailloux G, et al. Cefdinir versus cephalexin for the treatment of skin and skin-structure infections. The Cefdinir Adult Skin Infection Study Group. Clin Ther. 1998;20:244–56.PubMedCrossRef Tack KJ, Littlejohn TW, Mailloux G, et al. Cefdinir versus cephalexin for the treatment of skin and skin-structure infections. The Cefdinir Adult Skin Infection Study Group. Clin Ther. 1998;20:244–56.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Tarshis GA, Miskin BM, Jones TM, et al. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:2358–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Tarshis GA, Miskin BM, Jones TM, et al. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:2358–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Clarke MC, Cheng AC, Pollard JG, et al. Lessons learned from a randomized controlled trial of short-course intravenous antibiotic therapy for erysipelas and cellulitis of the lower limb (switch trial). Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019;6:ofz335.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Clarke MC, Cheng AC, Pollard JG, et al. Lessons learned from a randomized controlled trial of short-course intravenous antibiotic therapy for erysipelas and cellulitis of the lower limb (switch trial). Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019;6:ofz335.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Davis JS, Mackrow C, Binks P, et al. A double-blind randomized controlled trial of ibuprofen compared to placebo for uncomplicated cellulitis of the upper or lower limb. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017;23:242–6.PubMedCrossRef Davis JS, Mackrow C, Binks P, et al. A double-blind randomized controlled trial of ibuprofen compared to placebo for uncomplicated cellulitis of the upper or lower limb. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017;23:242–6.PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Ibrahim LF, Hopper SM, Orsini F, et al. Efficacy and safety of intravenous ceftriaxone at home versus intravenous flucloxacillin in hospital for children with cellulitis (CHOICE): a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:477–86.PubMedCrossRef Ibrahim LF, Hopper SM, Orsini F, et al. Efficacy and safety of intravenous ceftriaxone at home versus intravenous flucloxacillin in hospital for children with cellulitis (CHOICE): a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19:477–86.PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Leman P, Mukherjee D. Flucloxacillin alone or combined with benzylpenicillin to treat lower limb cellulitis: a randomised controlled trial. Emerg Med J. 2005;22:342–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Leman P, Mukherjee D. Flucloxacillin alone or combined with benzylpenicillin to treat lower limb cellulitis: a randomised controlled trial. Emerg Med J. 2005;22:342–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Bernard P, Plantin P, Roger H, et al. Roxithromycin versus penicillin in the treatment of erysipelas in adults: a comparative study. Br J Dermatol. 1992;127:155–9.PubMedCrossRef Bernard P, Plantin P, Roger H, et al. Roxithromycin versus penicillin in the treatment of erysipelas in adults: a comparative study. Br J Dermatol. 1992;127:155–9.PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Cranendonk DR, Opmeer BC, van Agtmael MA, et al. Antibiotic treatment for 6 days versus 12 days in patients with severe cellulitis: a multicentre randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:606–12.PubMedCrossRef Cranendonk DR, Opmeer BC, van Agtmael MA, et al. Antibiotic treatment for 6 days versus 12 days in patients with severe cellulitis: a multicentre randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26:606–12.PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Corwin P, Toop L, McGeoch G, et al. Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital. BMJ. 2005;330:129.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Corwin P, Toop L, McGeoch G, et al. Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital. BMJ. 2005;330:129.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Bergkvist PI, Sjöbeck K. Antibiotic and prednisolone therapy of erysipelas: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Scand J Infect Dis. 1997;29:377–82.PubMedCrossRef Bergkvist PI, Sjöbeck K. Antibiotic and prednisolone therapy of erysipelas: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Scand J Infect Dis. 1997;29:377–82.PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Brindle R, Williams OM, Davies P, et al. Adjunctive clindamycin for cellulitis: a clinical trial comparing flucloxacillin with or without clindamycin for the treatment of limb cellulitis. BMJ Open. 2017;7: e013260.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Brindle R, Williams OM, Davies P, et al. Adjunctive clindamycin for cellulitis: a clinical trial comparing flucloxacillin with or without clindamycin for the treatment of limb cellulitis. BMJ Open. 2017;7: e013260.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Boucher HW, Wilcox M, Talbot GH, et al. Once-weekly dalbavancin versus daily conventional therapy for skin infection. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2169–79.PubMedCrossRef Boucher HW, Wilcox M, Talbot GH, et al. Once-weekly dalbavancin versus daily conventional therapy for skin infection. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2169–79.PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Montero L. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of azithromycin and cefaclor in the treatment of children with acute skin and/or soft tissue infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;37:125–31.PubMedCrossRef Montero L. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of azithromycin and cefaclor in the treatment of children with acute skin and/or soft tissue infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;37:125–31.PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Moran GJ, Fang E, Corey GR, et al. Tedizolid for 6 days versus linezolid for 10 days for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ESTABLISH-2): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14:696–705.PubMedCrossRef Moran GJ, Fang E, Corey GR, et al. Tedizolid for 6 days versus linezolid for 10 days for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ESTABLISH-2): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14:696–705.PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference O’Riordan W, Green S, Overcash JS, et al. Omadacycline for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:528–38.PubMedCrossRef O’Riordan W, Green S, Overcash JS, et al. Omadacycline for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:528–38.PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Pertel PE, Eisenstein BI, Link AS, et al. The efficacy and safety of daptomycin vs vancomycin for the treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63:368–75.PubMedCrossRef Pertel PE, Eisenstein BI, Link AS, et al. The efficacy and safety of daptomycin vs vancomycin for the treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63:368–75.PubMedCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, et al. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;309:559–69.PubMedCrossRef Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, et al. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;309:559–69.PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Rodriguez-Solares A, Pérez-Gutiérrez F, Prosperi J, et al. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerance of azithromycin, dicloxacillin and flucloxacillin in the treatment of children with acute skin and skin-structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993;31:103–9.PubMedCrossRef Rodriguez-Solares A, Pérez-Gutiérrez F, Prosperi J, et al. A comparative study of the efficacy, safety and tolerance of azithromycin, dicloxacillin and flucloxacillin in the treatment of children with acute skin and skin-structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993;31:103–9.PubMedCrossRef
49.
go back to reference Brindle R, Williams OM, Barton E, et al. Assessment of antibiotic treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:1033–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Brindle R, Williams OM, Barton E, et al. Assessment of antibiotic treatment of cellulitis and erysipelas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:1033–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
go back to reference Bruun T, Oppegaard O, Hufthammer KO, et al. Early response in cellulitis: a prospective study of dynamics and predictors. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63:1034–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Bruun T, Oppegaard O, Hufthammer KO, et al. Early response in cellulitis: a prospective study of dynamics and predictors. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63:1034–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
go back to reference Talbot GH, Powers JH, Fleming TR, et al. Progress on developing endpoints for registrational clinical trials of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: update from the Biomarkers Consortium of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55:1114–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Talbot GH, Powers JH, Fleming TR, et al. Progress on developing endpoints for registrational clinical trials of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: update from the Biomarkers Consortium of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55:1114–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadata
Title
The impact of antibiotics on clinical response over time in uncomplicated cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors
Krishan Yadav
Natalia Krzyzaniak
Charlotte Alexander
Anna Mae Scott
Justin Clark
Paul Glasziou
Gerben Keijzers
Publication date
20-05-2022
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Infection / Issue 4/2022
Print ISSN: 0300-8126
Electronic ISSN: 1439-0973
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-022-01842-7

Other articles of this Issue 4/2022

Infection 4/2022 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.