Alternative Antimicrobial Irrigation Strategies for the Treatment of Infections in Children: A Review of the Existing Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a synergistic treatment approach with systemic antimicrobial therapy or a systemic antibiotic-sparing strategy, the local administration of antimicrobial agents has been proposed as an alternative route for complicated infections. With the rationale of concentrating the active principle in the desired target site, avoiding potentially toxic systemic levels and bypassing anatomical and physiological barriers, local irrigation or infusion of antibiotics may effectively shorten the antimicrobial therapy course and reduce both infection-related and systemic therapy-related complications. Although evidence from the adult population supports its use in selected patients with an acceptable safety profile, data specifically focused on the pediatric population are limited. To provide a rapid and easily accessible tool for clinical practice, we synthesized the most relevant evidence on the use of local antimicrobial agents in common severe infections in children: meningitis, mediastinitis, pleural infections, recurrent urinary infections, and peritonitis. A literature search was performed using predefined combined keywords through an electronic research database (PubMed). Described molecules, dosages, routes, treated age groups, and related efficacy have been summarized for prompt application to clinical practice. It should, however, be noted that the evidence for the pediatric population remains limited, and the local administration of several molecules remains off-label. A careful multidisciplinary and patient-tailored evaluation, as well as a rational use of available guidelines, should always be the basis of clinical decision making in settings where local administration of antibiotics may be considered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".