ArticleInfection and drug resistance2024
Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Colistin Sulphate in Treating Infections Caused by Carbapenem-Resistant Organisms and Analysis of Influencing Factors.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of colistin sulfate versus polymyxin B in critically ill patients with carbapenem-resistant gram-negative infections: a pilot inverse probability of treatment weighting-based retrospective cohort study.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Optimizing Colistin Sulfate Dosing in Severe Infections: A Population Pharmacokinetic Model-Guided Approach.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of colistin sulfate in critically ill patients based on NONMEM.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of polymyxin B sulfate versus colistin sulfate in ICU patients with nosocomial pneumonia caused by carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii: a multicenter, propensity score-matched, real-world cohort study.BMC infectious diseases · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of colistin sulfate in treating infections caused by carbapenem-resistant organisms (CRO) and to analyze potential factors impacting its effectiveness. Methods: In this retrospective study, medical records of CRO-infected patients from June 2020 to June 2023 were analyzed, divided into effective and ineffective treatment groups, and compared for clinical outcomes and adverse reactions. Multifactorial logistic regression and ROC curve analysis were used to identify influencing factors. Results: The study included 226 patients, with 124 in the effective treatment group and 102 in the ineffective group. A total of 293 CRO strains were cultured. The clinical efficacy rate of colistin sulfate was 54.87%, the microbiological efficacy rate 46.46%, and the hospital mortality rate 20.80%, with nephrotoxicity observed in 11.50% of patients. Multifactorial analysis identified APACHE II scores and vasoactive drug use as independent predictors of ineffective treatment, while treatment duration and albumin levels predicted effective treatment. ROC analysis indicated that albumin levels >34 g/L, APACHE II scores <13, and treatment duration >10 days correlated with better clinical efficacy. Conclusion: Colistin sulfate is both safe and effective in clinical settings. Factors such as treatment duration, albumin levels, APACHE II scores, and vasoactive drug use independently affect its clinical efficacy, providing valuable guidance for its informed clinical application.
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.