A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections
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 fo...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy 1990-03, Vol.25 (3), p.423-433 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 433 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 423 |
| container_title | Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy |
| container_volume | 25 |
| creator | JAUREGUI, L. E APPELBAUM, P. C FABIAN, T. C HAGEAGE, G STRAUSBAUGH, L MARTIN, L. F |
| description | 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. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79769428</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>15747065</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p1134-eb956da67f75f9dc359c73e5c77b2dfc19ca83212e1575ccfc5aca4670baa3eb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1KxDAUhYso4zj6CEIW4q6QNE3TLofBPxDc6Lrc3t5opE1r0wozj-BTm2pxK1y4HM7HOXCOorVIMx4nvBDH0ZpLrmKdKnkanXn_zjnPVJavolUics1Fuo6-tmwAV3etPVDNsLHOIjTMj1O9Z51hSKbraYBD54gFkPmpqQBHaNknDX7y7JVcUBat-_HniBra_azDjW_ExoFgbAM2B1o3DhBDNVe60GSdIRxt5_x5dGKg8XSx_E30cnvzvLuPH5_uHnbbx7gXQqYxVYXKasi00coUNUpVoJakUOsqqQ2KAiGXiUhIKK0QDSpASDPNKwBJldxE17-5_dB9TOTHsrUeqWnAUTf5Uhc6K9Ik_xcM-akOiwbwcgGnqqW67AfbwrAvl5WDf7X44MO6JiyO1v9hWSESrrn8Bt9_ihc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>15747065</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals Digital Archive Legacy</source><creator>JAUREGUI, L. E ; APPELBAUM, P. C ; FABIAN, T. C ; HAGEAGE, G ; STRAUSBAUGH, L ; MARTIN, L. F</creator><creatorcontrib>JAUREGUI, L. E ; APPELBAUM, P. C ; FABIAN, T. C ; HAGEAGE, G ; STRAUSBAUGH, L ; MARTIN, L. F</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0305-7453</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2091</identifier><identifier>PMID: 2187014</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JACHDX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Abdomen ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Antibacterial agents ; Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents ; Bacterial Infections - drug therapy ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cefoperazone - therapeutic use ; Clindamycin - therapeutic use ; Drug Therapy, Combination - therapeutic use ; Female ; Gentamicins - therapeutic use ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Microbial Sensitivity Tests ; Middle Aged ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Sulbactam - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 1990-03, Vol.25 (3), p.423-433</ispartof><rights>1990 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=6912070$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2187014$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>JAUREGUI, L. E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>APPELBAUM, P. C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FABIAN, T. C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HAGEAGE, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STRAUSBAUGH, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MARTIN, L. F</creatorcontrib><title>A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections</title><title>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy</title><addtitle>J Antimicrob Chemother</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Abdomen</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Antibacterial agents</subject><subject>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</subject><subject>Bacterial Infections - drug therapy</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cefoperazone - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Clindamycin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Drug Therapy, Combination - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gentamicins - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multicenter Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Sulbactam - therapeutic use</subject><issn>0305-7453</issn><issn>1460-2091</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1990</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1KxDAUhYso4zj6CEIW4q6QNE3TLofBPxDc6Lrc3t5opE1r0wozj-BTm2pxK1y4HM7HOXCOorVIMx4nvBDH0ZpLrmKdKnkanXn_zjnPVJavolUics1Fuo6-tmwAV3etPVDNsLHOIjTMj1O9Z51hSKbraYBD54gFkPmpqQBHaNknDX7y7JVcUBat-_HniBra_azDjW_ExoFgbAM2B1o3DhBDNVe60GSdIRxt5_x5dGKg8XSx_E30cnvzvLuPH5_uHnbbx7gXQqYxVYXKasi00coUNUpVoJakUOsqqQ2KAiGXiUhIKK0QDSpASDPNKwBJldxE17-5_dB9TOTHsrUeqWnAUTf5Uhc6K9Ik_xcM-akOiwbwcgGnqqW67AfbwrAvl5WDf7X44MO6JiyO1v9hWSESrrn8Bt9_ihc</recordid><startdate>199003</startdate><enddate>199003</enddate><creator>JAUREGUI, L. E</creator><creator>APPELBAUM, P. C</creator><creator>FABIAN, T. C</creator><creator>HAGEAGE, G</creator><creator>STRAUSBAUGH, L</creator><creator>MARTIN, L. F</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199003</creationdate><title>A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections</title><author>JAUREGUI, L. E ; APPELBAUM, P. C ; FABIAN, T. C ; HAGEAGE, G ; STRAUSBAUGH, L ; MARTIN, L. F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p1134-eb956da67f75f9dc359c73e5c77b2dfc19ca83212e1575ccfc5aca4670baa3eb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1990</creationdate><topic>Abdomen</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Antibacterial agents</topic><topic>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</topic><topic>Bacterial Infections - drug therapy</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cefoperazone - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Clindamycin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Drug Therapy, Combination - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gentamicins - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multicenter Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Sulbactam - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>JAUREGUI, L. E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>APPELBAUM, P. C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FABIAN, T. C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HAGEAGE, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STRAUSBAUGH, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MARTIN, L. F</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>JAUREGUI, L. E</au><au>APPELBAUM, P. C</au><au>FABIAN, T. C</au><au>HAGEAGE, G</au><au>STRAUSBAUGH, L</au><au>MARTIN, L. F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections</atitle><jtitle>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy</jtitle><addtitle>J Antimicrob Chemother</addtitle><date>1990-03</date><risdate>1990</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>423</spage><epage>433</epage><pages>423-433</pages><issn>0305-7453</issn><eissn>1460-2091</eissn><coden>JACHDX</coden><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.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>2187014</pmid><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0305-7453 |
| ispartof | Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 1990-03, Vol.25 (3), p.423-433 |
| issn | 0305-7453 1460-2091 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79769428 |
| source | MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals Digital Archive Legacy |
| subjects | Abdomen Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Antibacterial agents Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents Bacterial Infections - drug therapy Biological and medical sciences Cefoperazone - therapeutic use Clindamycin - therapeutic use Drug Therapy, Combination - therapeutic use Female Gentamicins - therapeutic use Humans Male Medical sciences Microbial Sensitivity Tests Middle Aged Multicenter Studies as Topic Pharmacology. Drug treatments Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Sulbactam - therapeutic use |
| title | A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T22%3A57%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20randomized%20clinical%20study%20of%20cefoperazone%20and%20sulbactam%20versus%20gentamicin%20and%20clindamycin%20in%20the%20treatment%20of%20intra-abdominal%20infections&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20antimicrobial%20chemotherapy&rft.au=JAUREGUI,%20L.%20E&rft.date=1990-03&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=423&rft.epage=433&rft.pages=423-433&rft.issn=0305-7453&rft.eissn=1460-2091&rft.coden=JACHDX&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E15747065%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=15747065&rft_id=info:pmid/2187014&rfr_iscdi=true |