BACKGROUND: Community-associated methicillin-resistant S. aureus (CA-MRSA) is the most common organism isolated from purulent skin infections. Antibiotics are usually not beneficial for skin abscess, and national guidelines do not recommend CA-MRSA coverage for cellulitis, except purulent cellulitis, which is uncommon. Despite this, antibiotics targeting CA-MRSA are prescribed commonly and increasingly for skin infections, perhaps due, in part, to lack of experimental evidence among cellulitis patients. We test the hypothesis that antibiotics targeting CA-MRSA are beneficial in the treatment of cellulitis. METHODS: We performed a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial from 2007 to 2011. We enrolled patients with cellulitis, no abscesses, symptoms for <1 week, and no diabetes, immunosuppression, peripheral vascular disease, or hospitalization (clinicaltrials.gov NCT00676130). All participants received cephalexin. Additionally, each was randomized to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole or placebo. We provided 14 days of antibiotics and instructed participants to continue therapy for ≥1 week, then stop 3 days after they felt the infection to be cured. Our main outcome measure was the risk difference for treatment success, determined in person at 2 weeks, with telephone and medical record confirmation at 1 month. RESULTS:We enrolled 153 participants, and 146 had outcome data for intent-to-treat analysis. Median age was 29, range 3-74. Of intervention participants, 62/73 (85%) were cured versus 60/73 controls (82%), a risk difference of 2.7% (95% confidence interval, -9.3% to 15%; P = .66). No covariates predicted treatment response, including nasal MRSA colonization and purulence at enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients diagnosed with cellulitis without abscess, the addition of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole to cephalexin did not improve outcomes overall or by subgroup. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00676130.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Community-associated methicillin-resistant S. aureus (CA-MRSA) is the most common organism isolated from purulent skin infections. Antibiotics are usually not beneficial for skin abscess, and national guidelines do not recommend CA-MRSA coverage for cellulitis, except purulent cellulitis, which is uncommon. Despite this, antibiotics targeting CA-MRSA are prescribed commonly and increasingly for skin infections, perhaps due, in part, to lack of experimental evidence among cellulitispatients. We test the hypothesis that antibiotics targeting CA-MRSA are beneficial in the treatment of cellulitis. METHODS: We performed a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial from 2007 to 2011. We enrolled patients with cellulitis, no abscesses, symptoms for <1 week, and no diabetes, immunosuppression, peripheral vascular disease, or hospitalization (clinicaltrials.gov NCT00676130). All participants received cephalexin. Additionally, each was randomized to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole or placebo. We provided 14 days of antibiotics and instructed participants to continue therapy for ≥1 week, then stop 3 days after they felt the infection to be cured. Our main outcome measure was the risk difference for treatment success, determined in person at 2 weeks, with telephone and medical record confirmation at 1 month. RESULTS: We enrolled 153 participants, and 146 had outcome data for intent-to-treat analysis. Median age was 29, range 3-74. Of intervention participants, 62/73 (85%) were cured versus 60/73 controls (82%), a risk difference of 2.7% (95% confidence interval, -9.3% to 15%; P = .66). No covariates predicted treatment response, including nasal MRSA colonization and purulence at enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients diagnosed with cellulitis without abscess, the addition of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole to cephalexin did not improve outcomes overall or by subgroup. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00676130.
Authors: Michael W Ellis; Carey D Schlett; Eugene V Millar; Kenneth J Wilkins; Katrina B Crawford; Stephanie M Morrison-Rodriguez; Laura A Pacha; Rachel J Gorwitz; Jeffrey B Lanier; David R Tribble Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Michael S Pulia; Mary R Calderone; John R Meister; Jamie Santistevan; Larissa May Journal: Curr Infect Dis Rep Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 3.725
Authors: Loren G Miller; Robert S Daum; C Buddy Creech; David Young; Michele D Downing; Samantha J Eells; Stephanie Pettibone; Rebecca J Hoagland; Henry F Chambers Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jasmine R Marcelin; Douglas W Challener; Eugene M Tan; Brian D Lahr; Larry M Baddour Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2017-07-08 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Andre Kriegeskorte; Nicola Ivan Lorè; Alessandra Bragonzi; Camilla Riva; Marco Kelkenberg; Karsten Becker; Richard A Proctor; Georg Peters; Barbara C Kahl Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Hermione J Hurley; Bryan C Knepper; Connie S Price; Philip S Mehler; William J Burman; Timothy C Jenkins Journal: Am J Med Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 4.965