Literature DB >> 8785019

A risk-benefit assessment of teicoplanin in the treatment of infections.

F de Lalla1, A Tramarin.   

Abstract

Teicoplanin is a glycopeptide antibiotic whose activity is selectively oriented against Gram-positive aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, Clostridium difficile, Peptostreptococcus spp. and Corynebacterium jeikeium; such activity is affected by neither methicillin resistance nor beta-lactamase production. Teicoplanin is not significantly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract; consequently, it has to be administered intravenously (either by infusion or by rapid injection) or intramuscularly. Its long half-life allows regimens based upon once daily administration. The adverse effects most frequently associated with teicoplanin treatment are local and hypersensitivity reactions, such as itching and drug fever; anaphylactoid reactions (the 'red man syndrome') are seldom observed. Teicoplanin also has less potential than vancomycin to cause nephrotoxicity, especially when administered in combination with an aminoglycoside. Teicoplanin has been proven to be effective in the treatment of microbiologically documented Gram-positive infections, including 'difficult to treat infections' such as endocarditis and prosthetic infections. Furthermore, recent trials in patients with haematological malignancies or other cancers have clearly demonstrated that teicoplanin is at least as efficacious as vancomycin in the empirical initial antibiotic regimen for febrile neutropenic patients, and is associated with fewer adverse effects. Finally, owing to its good tolerability profile and the advantage of once daily administration by both intravenous and intramuscular routes, teicoplanin has proven to be very useful for the outpatient treatment of serious Gram-positive infections. In conclusion, teicoplanin is potentially an effective alternative to vancomycin both in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients, with the advantage over vancomycin of single daily dose administration and lower toxicity. Further comparative studies with vancomycin are, however, required to better define the therapeutic role of teicoplanin for particular infections (i.e. infective endocarditis).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8785019     DOI: 10.2165/00002018-199513050-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Saf        ISSN: 0114-5916            Impact factor:   5.606


  62 in total

1.  Phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity of glycopeptide resistance determinants in gram-positive bacteria.

Authors:  S Dutka-Malen; R Leclercq; V Coutant; J Duval; P Courvalin
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Comparison of efficacy and safety of teicoplanin in gram-positive infections: a multicentre study.

Authors:  E Lang; V Schäfer; B Schaaf; R Dennhardt
Journal:  Scand J Infect Dis Suppl       Date:  1990

Review 3.  Dosage recommendations for teicoplanin.

Authors:  A P Wilson; R N Grüneberg; H Neu
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 5.790

4.  Vancomycin added to empirical combination antibiotic therapy for fever in granulocytopenic cancer patients. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) International Antimicrobial Therapy Cooperative Group and the National Cancer Institute of Canada-Clinical Trials Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 5.226

5.  Spanish experience with teicoplanin.

Authors:  M Fernández-Guerrero; M Gobernado; J Ariza; A Williams
Journal:  Scand J Infect Dis Suppl       Date:  1990

6.  4-week treatment of streptococcal native valve endocarditis with high-dose teicoplanin.

Authors:  M Venditti; V Gelfusa; P Serra; C Brandimarte; A Micozzi; P Martino
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Teicoplanin in home therapy of the terminally ill child.

Authors:  L M Ball; S Siddal; H van Saenen
Journal:  Eur J Haematol Suppl       Date:  1993

8.  Safety and efficacy of teicoplanin for bone and joint infections: results of a community-based trial.

Authors:  W G Weinberg
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 0.954

9.  Comparison of intravenous teicoplanin with intramuscular amoxycillin for the prophylaxis of streptococcal bacteraemia in dental patients.

Authors:  D C Shanson; A Shehata; M Tadayon; M Harris
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 5.790

10.  Double-blind comparison of teicoplanin versus vancomycin in febrile neutropenic patients receiving concomitant tobramycin and piperacillin: effect on cyclosporin A-associated nephrotoxicity.

Authors:  A Kureishi; P J Jewesson; M Rubinger; C D Cole; D E Reece; G L Phillips; J A Smith; A W Chow
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  3 in total

1.  Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital.

Authors:  Aylin Acar Sancar; Selen Yegenoglu; Robin de Vries; Maarten J Postma; Nimet Simsek; Petros Pechlivanoglou; Serhat Unal
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2008-09-21

Review 2.  Total Syntheses of Vancomycin-Related Glycopeptide Antibiotics and Key Analogues.

Authors:  Akinori Okano; Nicholas A Isley; Dale L Boger
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 60.622

Review 3.  Targeting host cell proteases as a potential treatment strategy to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the respiratory tract.

Authors:  Ismail A El-Shimy; Mahmoud M A Mohamed; Syed Shahzad Hasan; Muhammad A Hadi
Journal:  Pharmacol Res Perspect       Date:  2021-02
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.