Literature DB >> 8467623

Comparison of oral cefpodoxime proxetil and cefaclor in the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections.

D L Stevens1, F Pien, M Drehobl.   

Abstract

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of cefpodoxime proxetil and cefaclor in the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections. Patients were aged > or = 12 years with acute (< or = 7 days duration), single-site skin or skin-structure infections. The 7- to 10-day treatment regimens were cefpodoxime proxetil (400 mg cefpodoxime) orally with food twice a day with cefaclor-matched placebo (orally, fasting, three times a day); or cefaclor (Ceclor; 500 mg anhydrous equivalent) orally, fasting, three times a day, with cefpodoxime-matched placebo (orally with food twice a day). Clinical progress and cultures were evaluated upon admission to the study; on study days 7-10 and 15-18; and 2-3 weeks after treatment. Cefpodoxime had lower minimum inhibitory concentrations against the majority of Staphylococcus species than did cefaclor. Both treatments were highly effective (99% pathogen eradication and 86% cure rate). These high eradication rates were not unexpected in this study of minor infections in which patients with resistant pathogens were excluded. Cefaclor had a higher failure rate [2 (4%) of 57], than did cefpodoxime [2 (1%) of 139; p not significant]. Most patients in both groups completed treatment as planned: 185 (74%) of 249 cefpodoxime-treated patients and 91 (75%) of 122 cefaclor-treated patients. Both treatments were well tolerated and considered safe and effective in the treatment of skin and skin structure infections. However, the twice-a-day dosing regimen for cefpodoxime proxetil compared with the three-times-a-day regimen for cefaclor may result in better patient compliance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8467623     DOI: 10.1016/0732-8893(93)90006-s

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis        ISSN: 0732-8893            Impact factor:   2.803


  6 in total

Review 1.  Clinical and economic considerations in the use of third-generation oral cephalosporins.

Authors:  S T Chambers; D R Murdoch; M J Pearce
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Cefpodoxime proxetil: a review of its use in the management of bacterial infections in paediatric patients.

Authors:  B Fulton; C M Perry
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.022

Review 3.  Staphylococcal skin infections in children: rational drug therapy recommendations.

Authors:  Shamez Ladhani; Mehdi Garbash
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.022

Review 4.  Interventions for impetigo.

Authors:  Sander Koning; Renske van der Sande; Arianne P Verhagen; Lisette W A van Suijlekom-Smit; Andrew D Morris; Christopher C Butler; Marjolein Berger; Johannes C van der Wouden
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-01-18

5.  Cefpodoxime: pharmacokinetics and therapeutic uses.

Authors:  Krishan Chugh; Shruti Agrawal
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.967

Review 6.  Cefpodoxime proxetil. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic potential.

Authors:  J E Frampton; R N Brogden; H D Langtry; M M Buckley
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 9.546

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.