Literature DB >> 8604912

Results of a randomized trial comparing sequential intravenous/oral treatment with ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole to imipenem/cilastatin for intra-abdominal infections. The Intra-Abdominal Infection Study Group.

J S Solomkin1, H H Reinhart, E P Dellinger, J M Bohnen, O D Rotstein, S B Vogel, H H Simms, C S Hill, H S Bjornson, D C Haverstock, H O Coulter, R M Echols.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial, ciprofloxacin/metronidazole was compared with imipenem/cilastatin for treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections. A secondary objective was to demonstrate the ability to switch responding patients from intravenous (IV) to oral (PO) therapy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Intra-abdominal infections result in substantial morbidity, mortality, and cost. Antimicrobial therapy often includes a 7- to 10-day intravenous course. The use of oral antimicrobials is a recent advance due to the availability of agents with good tissue pharmacokinetics and potent aerobic gram-negative activity.
METHODS: Patients were randomized to either ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole intravenously (CIP/MTZ IV) or imipenem intravenously (IMI IV) throughout their treatment course, or ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole intravenously and treatment with oral ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole when oral feeding was resumed (CIP/MTZ IV/PO).
RESULTS: Among 671 patients who constituted the intent-to-treat population, overall success rates were as follows: 82% for the group treated with CIP/MTZ IV; 84% for the CIP/MTZ IV/PO group; and 82% for the IMI IV group. For 330 valid patients, treatment success occurred in 84% of patients treated with CIP/MTZ IV, 86% of those treated with CIP/MTZ IV/PO, and 81% of the patients treated with IMI IV. Analysis of microbiology in the 30 patients undergoing intervention after treatment failure suggested that persistence of gram-negative organisms was more common in the IMI IV-treated patients who subsequently failed. Of 46 CIP/MTZ IV/PO patients (active oral arm), treatment success occurred in 96%, compared with 89% for those treated with CIP/MTZ IV and 89% for those receiving IMI IV. Patients who received intravenous/oral therapy were treated, overall, for an average of 8.6 +/- 3.6 days, with an average of 4.0 +/- 3.0 days of oral treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate statistical equivalence between CIP/MTZ IV and IMI IV in both the intent-to-treat and valid populations. Conversion to oral therapy with CIP/MTZ appears as effective as continued intravenous therapy in patients able to tolerate oral feedings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8604912      PMCID: PMC1235120          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199603000-00012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  39 in total

1.  Evaluation of new anti-infective drugs for the treatment of intraabdominal infections. Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Food and Drug Administration.

Authors:  J S Solomkin; D L Hemsell; R Sweet; F Tally; J Bartlett
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 9.079

2.  General guidelines for the clinical evaluation of anti-infective drug products. Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Food and Drug Administration.

Authors:  T R Beam; D N Gilbert; C M Kunin
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  European guidelines for anti-infective drug products. Introduction.

Authors:  T R Beam; D N Gilbert; C M Kunin
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Treatment of severe pneumonia in hospitalized patients: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial comparing intravenous ciprofloxacin with imipenem-cilastatin. The Severe Pneumonia Study Group.

Authors:  M P Fink; D R Snydman; M S Niederman; K V Leeper; R H Johnson; S O Heard; R G Wunderink; J W Caldwell; J J Schentag; G A Siami
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Prospective randomized study of piperacillin/tazobactam therapy of surgically treated intra-abdominal infection. The Piperacillin/Tazobactam Intra-Abdominal Infection Study Group.

Authors:  H C Polk; M P Fink; M Laverdiere; S E Wilson; G E Garber; P S Barie; J C Hebert; W G Cheadle
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 0.688

6.  Efficacy of a beta-lactamase inhibitor combination for serious intraabdominal infections.

Authors:  A P Walker; R L Nichols; R F Wilson; B A Bivens; D D Trunkey; C E Edmiston; J W Smith; R E Condon
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  A clinical comparison of cefepime and metronidazole versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the antibiotic management of surgically treated advanced appendicitis.

Authors:  T V Berne; A E Yellin; M D Appleman; P N Heseltine; M A Gill
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1993

8.  Comparative in-vitro activities of the new quinolone, Bay y 3118, and ciprofloxacin, sparfloxacin, tosufloxacin, CI-960 and CI-990.

Authors:  A Bauernfeind
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 5.790

9.  Implications of leukocytosis and fever at conclusion of antibiotic therapy for intra-abdominal sepsis.

Authors:  E S Lennard; E P Dellinger; M J Wertz; B H Minshew
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  In vivo efficacies of quinolones and clindamycin for treatment of infections with Bacteroides fragilis and/or Escherichia coli in mice: correlation with in vitro susceptibilities.

Authors:  I Brook
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  34 in total

Review 1.  Use of newer quinolones for the treatment of intraabdominal infections: focus on clinafloxacin.

Authors:  C E Nord
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1999 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 2.  Monobactams and carbapenems for treatment of intraabdominal infections.

Authors:  B Brismar; C E Nord
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 3.  New developments and concepts in antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  Z Younes; D A Johnson
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2000-08

Review 4.  Addressing Concerns about Changing the Route of Antimicrobial Administration from Intravenous to Oral in Adult Inpatients.

Authors:  Lizanne Béïque; Rosemary Zvonar
Journal:  Can J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug

Review 5.  Management of peritonitis in the critically ill patient.

Authors:  Carlos A Ordoñez; Juan Carlos Puyana
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 6.  [Antimicrobial and antimycotic therapy of intra-abdominal infections].

Authors:  P Kujath; M Hoffmann; A Rodloff
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  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

Review 8.  Operative and nonoperative therapy of intraabdominal infections.

Authors:  D H Wittmann
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1998 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 9.  Primary and secondary peritonitis: an update.

Authors:  M Laroche; G Harding
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.267

10.  Outcomes of early switching from intravenous to oral antibiotics on medical wards.

Authors:  Dominik Mertz; Michael Koller; Patricia Haller; Markus L Lampert; Herbert Plagge; Balthasar Hug; Gian Koch; Manuel Battegay; Ursula Flückiger; Stefano Bassetti
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2009-04-28       Impact factor: 5.790

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.