RESUMEN
Sixty neutropenic patients with infection were studied in a randomized trial comparing treatment with latamoxef (moxalactam) alone or with cephradine and tobramycin. The two treatment groups were comparable in respect to their clinical sites of infection, degree of neutropenia underlying malignancy, and organisms. Forty-two bacterial isolates were obtained from various clinically infected sites. All but two of these isolates were sensitive to latamoxef (30 highly sensitive, ten moderately sensitive). In contrast 29 of the isolates were resistant to cephradine and eight were resistant to both cephradine and tobramycin. Control of infection was achieved in 72% of patients treated with latamoxef and 55% treated with cephradine plus tobramycin. Latamoxef appears to be an effective antibiotic for the treatment of neutropenic patients with infection.
Asunto(s)
Agranulocitosis/complicaciones , Infecciones Bacterianas/tratamiento farmacológico , Cefalosporinas/uso terapéutico , Cefradina/uso terapéutico , Moxalactam/uso terapéutico , Neutropenia/complicaciones , Tobramicina/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Anciano , Infecciones Bacterianas/etiología , Cefradina/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Farmacorresistencia Microbiana , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Persona de Mediana Edad , Moxalactam/efectos adversos , Distribución Aleatoria , Tobramicina/efectos adversosAsunto(s)
Cefalexina/uso terapéutico , Cefalosporinas/uso terapéutico , Cefradina/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Cutáneas Infecciosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Cefalexina/efectos adversos , Cefalexina/antagonistas & inhibidores , Cefalosporinasa/metabolismo , Cefradina/efectos adversos , Cefradina/antagonistas & inhibidores , Niño , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Farmacorresistencia Microbiana , Humanos , Hidrólisis , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Staphylococcus/enzimología , Staphylococcus aureus/efectos de los fármacosAsunto(s)
Cefalexina/uso terapéutico , Cefalosporinas/uso terapéutico , Cefradina/uso terapéutico , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Aguda , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Bronquitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Cefalexina/efectos adversos , Cefradina/efectos adversos , Niño , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Evaluación de Medicamentos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Persona de Mediana Edad , Faringitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Neumocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neumonía/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estreptocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Streptococcus pneumoniae/aislamiento & purificación , Streptococcus pyogenes/aislamiento & purificaciónRESUMEN
A double-blind trial was carried out comparing cephradine and ampicillin in the treatment of urinary tract infections in 42 females attending a hospital Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Results showed that patients did better in the cephradine group than the ampicillin group, both bacteriologically and clinically. The numbers in each group were small, however, and did not reach statistical significance.