P-1181. Gepotidacin vs Standard Antibiotics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety in Urogenital Infections
A S H E S H DAS, umama Alam, Debvarsha Mandal, Ali Naseem, Aparna Malireddi, Hrishikesh Kommu, Jana Al Jnainati, Mohammed Muzammil, Asim Ali Syed, Aashwin Kaushal, Kunal Gahlot, Hanisha Reddy Kukunoor, Sailesh I S Kumar, rithvika Badugu

TL;DR
Gepotidacin is as effective as standard antibiotics for urogenital infections but causes more gastrointestinal and liver side effects.
Contribution
A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Gepotidacin with standard antibiotics for urogenital infections.
Findings
Gepotidacin showed similar microbiological and clinical cure rates compared to standard antibiotics.
Gepotidacin was associated with higher rates of gastrointestinal and hepatic adverse events.
Microbiological failure rates were lower with Gepotidacin but not statistically significant.
Abstract
Gepotidacin is a novel, a triazaacenaphthylene antibiotic which has been proven to be an effective therapeutic option for several urogenital infections including Neisseria gonorrhea (NG). Amidst the rising antimicrobial resistance, this offers a promising alternative to traditional antibiotics. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates its efficacy and safety in treating urogenital infections. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library identified Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing Gepotidacin with standard antibiotics for urogenital infections through March 2025. Data were analyzed using RevMan 4.2.1. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel methods. Fixed- or random-effects models were used based on heterogeneity (I²). Statistical significance was p < 0.05. Risk of bias was assessed via RoB 2.0. Four…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsReproductive tract infections research · Bacterial Infections and Vaccines · Urinary Tract Infections Management
