BACKGROUND: Treatment of aspiration pneumonia is becoming an important issue due to aging of populations worldwide. Effectiveness of tazobactam/piperacillin (TAZ/PIPC) in aspiration pneumonia is not clear. PURPOSE: To compare clinical efficacy between TAZ/PIPC (1:4 compound) and imipenem/cilastatin (IPM/CS) in patients with moderate-to-severe aspiration pneumonia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, randomized study either TAZ/PIPC 5 g or IPM/CS 1 g was intravenously administered every 12 h to patients with moderate-to-severe community-acquired aspiration pneumonia or nursing home-acquired pneumonia with risk for aspiration pneumonia for average 11 days. The primary outcome was clinical response rate at the end of treatment (EOT) in validated per-protocol (VPP) population. Secondary outcomes were clinical response during treatment (days 4 and 7) and at the end of study (EOS) in VPP population, and survival at day 30 in modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population. RESULTS: There was no difference between the groups in primary or secondary outcome. However, significantly faster improvement as measured by axillary temperature (p < 0.05) and WBC count (p = 0.01) was observed under TAZ/PIPC treatment. In patients with gram-positive bacterial infection, TAZ/PIPC was more effective at EOT in VPP population (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION:TAZ/PIPC is as effective and safe as IPM/CS in the treatment of moderate- to-severe aspiration pneumonia. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Treatment of aspiration pneumonia is becoming an important issue due to aging of populations worldwide. Effectiveness of tazobactam/piperacillin (TAZ/PIPC) in aspiration pneumonia is not clear. PURPOSE: To compare clinical efficacy between TAZ/PIPC (1:4 compound) and imipenem/cilastatin (IPM/CS) in patients with moderate-to-severe aspiration pneumonia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, randomized study either TAZ/PIPC 5 g or IPM/CS 1 g was intravenously administered every 12 h to patients with moderate-to-severe community-acquired aspiration pneumonia or nursing home-acquired pneumonia with risk for aspiration pneumonia for average 11 days. The primary outcome was clinical response rate at the end of treatment (EOT) in validated per-protocol (VPP) population. Secondary outcomes were clinical response during treatment (days 4 and 7) and at the end of study (EOS) in VPP population, and survival at day 30 in modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population. RESULTS: There was no difference between the groups in primary or secondary outcome. However, significantly faster improvement as measured by axillary temperature (p < 0.05) and WBC count (p = 0.01) was observed under TAZ/PIPC treatment. In patients with gram-positive bacterial infection, TAZ/PIPC was more effective at EOT in VPP population (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION:TAZ/PIPC is as effective and safe as IPM/CS in the treatment of moderate- to-severe aspiration pneumonia. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.