Literature DB >> 2187014

A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections.

L E Jauregui1, P C Appelbaum, T C Fabian, G Hageage, L Strausbaugh, L F Martin.   

Abstract

This report summarizes the experience of investigators in four medical centres who compared the combination of cefoperazone/sulbactam against gentamicin/clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. One hundred and fifty-two patients were enrolled in the study and all were evaluable for safety and tolerance, 110 were evaluable for efficacy. Of the 76 patients (49 male, 27 female) treated with cefoperazone/sulbactam 66 (86.8%) were cured, five (6.6%) improved and five (6.6%) failed to respond to treatment. Of 34 patients treated with gentamicin/clindamycin, 21 (61.8%) were cured, four (11.8%) improved and nine (26.4%) failed. Cure rates for patients receiving cefoperazone/sulbactam were significantly higher than those of patients receiving gentamicin/clindamycin (P less than 0.006). Failures in both groups were attributable in part to pseudomonal and enterococcal infection and abscess formation. The addition of sulbactam to cefoperazone rendered cefoperazone-resistant organisms susceptible to cefoperazone in 11 of the 76 cases (14.4%) and thus permitted treatment with this agent. The present study confirms the safety and clinical efficacy of cefoperazone/sulbactam and suggests that this combination is a viable alternative to an aminoglycoside plus clindamycin for intra-abdominal infections.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2187014     DOI: 10.1093/jac/25.3.423

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother        ISSN: 0305-7453            Impact factor:   5.790


  9 in total

Review 1.  Current antimicrobial therapy of anaerobic infections.

Authors:  C V Sanders; K E Aldridge
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 3.267

2.  Risk factors leading to clinical failure in the treatment of intra-abdominal or skin/soft tissue infections.

Authors:  M E Falagas; L Barefoot; J Griffith; R Ruthazar; D R Snydman
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Canadian practice guidelines for surgical intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  Anthony W Chow; Gerald A Evans; Avery B Nathens; Chad G Ball; Glen Hansen; Godfrey Km Harding; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Karl Weiss; George G Zhanel
Journal:  Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.471

4.  Imipenem or cefoperazone-sulbactam combined with vancomycin for therapy of presumed or proven infection in neutropenic cancer patients.

Authors:  G Bodey; D Abi-Said; K Rolston; I Raad; E Whimbey
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 5.  Beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations: development, antibacterial activity and clinical applications.

Authors:  R Sutherland
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1995 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 6.  Piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of polymicrobial infections.

Authors:  S L Gorbach
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Piperacillin-tazobactam versus imipenem-cilastatin for treatment of intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  B Brismar; A S Malmborg; G Tunevall; B Wretlind; L Bergman; L O Mentzing; P O Nyström; E Kihlström; B Bäckstrand; T Skau
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Therapy with cefoperazone plus sulbactam against disseminated infection due to cefoperazone-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli in granulocytopenic mice.

Authors:  P H Chandrasekar; J A Sluchak; J A Kruse
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 9.  Entecavir-Associated Thrombocytopenia in a Decompensated Cirrhotic Patient: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Authors:  Xiaoli Fan; Liyu Chen; Jingyu Yang; Ping Feng
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.889

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.