SynthesisBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2024
Local anesthetics as a tool for Staphylococcus spp. control: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of intravenous morphine and lidocaine on bacterial growth.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Antibacterial activity of local anesthetics against multidrug-resistant bacteria in vitro.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this work was to carry out a systematic review on the effectiveness of local anesthetics as antimicrobial agents against Staphylococcus spp. Searches were performed in the PubMed, Web of science, Scopus, Embase and Lilacs databases. As inclusion criteria, complete original articles, with in vitro experimental tests with the application of selected anesthetics and bacteria of the genus Staphylococcus spp. This review followed the methodological checklist for writing papers reporting systematic reviews by the PRISMA statement. The risk of bias was assessed according to the JBI critical appraisal checklist. Analysis was performed using an anesthetic-moderated simple linear regression model. This systematic review was registered by the Open Science Framework-OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/C5JM7 ). Initially, 1141 articles were found, of which, after careful selection, 52 articles were analyzed. Lidocaine was the most commonly used anesthetic, being evaluated in 35 of the articles. S. aureus ATCC 25923 was the standard microorganism in 17 articles. The impact of the anesthetic concentration in relation to the antimicrobial effect was evaluated and the results showed that there was no statistically significant difference. (F [5, 12] = 0.688 p = 0.642), even when taking into account the moderator effect of anesthetics individually. Therefore, although the antimicrobial effect of local anesthetics was demonstrated in 82.7% of the studies evaluated, great heterogeneity of the results was found, which made it impossible to carry out a meta-analysis and make recommendations based on the evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.