The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mupirocin Prophylaxis to Prevent Staphylococcus aureus Infection in Patients Undergoing Dialysis: A Meta-analysis
Abstract
A systematic review of the English-language literature was performed to determine the overall benefit of mupirocin therapy in reducing the rate of Staphylococcus aureus infection among patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Included studies met the following criteria: they were randomized clinical trials or cohort studies; cohorts consisted of adults (age, > or =18 years) requiring HD or PD; mupirocin therapy was administered to the treatment group, and placebo or no therapy was administered to the control group; and the primary outcome of interest was the difference in the number of S. aureus infections among mupirocin-treated and -untreated patients. Ten studies described in 9 articles were analyzed. A total of 2445 patients were included in the analysis. Use of mupirocin reduced the rate of S. aureus infections by 68% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57%-76%) among all patients undergoing dialysis; risk reductions were 80% (95% CI, 65%-89%) among patients undergoing HD and 63% (95% CI, 50%-73%) among patients undergoing PD. When data were stratified by type of infection, S. aureus bacteremia was found to be reduced by 78% among patients undergoing HD, and peritonitis and exit-site infections were found to be reduced by 66% and 62%, respectively, among patients undergoing PD. Mupirocin prophylaxis substantially reduces the rate of S. aureus infection in the dialysis population. Optimal regimens that minimize the emergence of mupirocin resistance need to be explored.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
ISPD Peritonitis Recommendations: 2016 Update on Prevention and Treatment
Li, P. K.-T., Szeto, C. C., Piraino, B., de Arteaga, J., Fan, S., Figueiredo, A. E., Fish, D. N., Goffin, E., Kim, Y.-L., Salzer, W., et al. (2016) · Peritoneal Dialysis International: Journal of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis · doi:10.3747/pdi.2016.00078 · Cited by 907
Community-acquired meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: an emerging threat
Zetola, N., Francis, J. S., Nuermberger, E. L., & Bishai, W. R. (2005) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(05)70112-2 · Cited by 791
Patel, J. B., Gorwitz, R. J., & Jernigan, J. A. (2009) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/605495 · Cited by 312
Simor, A. E., Phillips, E., McGeer, A., Konvalinka, A., Loeb, M., Devlin, H. R., & Kiss, A. (2007) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/510392 · Cited by 286
Warady, B. A., Bakkaloglu, S., Newland, J., Cantwell, M., Verrina, E., Neu, A., Chadha, V., Yap, H.-K., & Schaefer, F. (2012) · Peritoneal Dialysis International: Journal of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis · doi:10.3747/pdi.2011.00091 · Cited by 272
Metadata
- Authors
- Tacconelli, E., Carmeli, Y., Aizer, A., Ferreira, G., Foreman, M. G., & D'Agata, E. M. C.
- Venue
- Clinical Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-12-15
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1629-1638
- ISSN
- 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-6591
- OpenAlex
- W1985514510
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mupirocin Prophylaxis to Prevent Staphylococcus aureus Infection in Patients Undergoing Dialysis: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/379715
- The paper
- Tacconelli, E., Carmeli, Y., Aizer, A., Ferreira, G., Foreman, M. G., & D'Agata, E. M. C. (2003). Mupirocin Prophylaxis to Prevent Staphylococcus aureus Infection in Patients Undergoing Dialysis: A Meta-analysis. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1086/379715
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.