Systematic review: the treatment of noncardiac chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) remains a challenge. This is in part due to the heterogeneous nature of this disorder. Several conditions are associated with NCCP including gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), oesophageal dysmotility, oesophageal hypersensitivity as well as others. AIM: To determine the currently available therapeutic modalities for NCCP. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature that was published between January, 1980 and March, 2011. We identified 734 studies; 68 of them met entry criteria. RESULTS: Patients with GERD-related NCCP should receive proton pump inhibitors (PPI) twice daily for at least 8 weeks. Smooth muscle relaxants are only recommended for temporary relief of NCCP with motility disorders. Botulinum toxin injection of the distal oesophagus may be effective in the treatment of NCCP and spastic oesophageal motility disorders. Studies assessing the value of tricyclic antidepressants, trazodone and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in NCCP are relatively small, but suggest an oesophageal analgesic effect in NCCP patients that is limited by their side effects profile. The usage of theophylline to treat patients with non-GERD-related NCCP should be weighed against its potential toxicity. Use of complementary medicine has been scarcely studied in NCCP. Patients with coexisting psychological morbidity or those not responding to any medical therapy should be considered for psychological intervention. Cognitive behavioural therapy and hypnotherapy may be useful in the treatment of NCCP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with GERD-related noncardiac chest pain should be treated with at least double dose PPI. The primary treatment for non-GERD-related noncardiac chest pain, regardless if oesophageal dysmotility is present, is pain modulators.

Clinical trial: the effect of Johrei on symptoms of patients with functional chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Patients with functional chest pain (FCP) represent a therapeutic challenge for practising physicians. AIM: To determine the efficacy of Johrei as compared to wait-list in improving symptoms of FCP patients. METHODS: Patients with chest pain of noncardiac origin for at least 3 months were enrolled into the study. All patients had to have negative upper endoscopy, pH testing and oesophageal manometry prior to randomization. Subsequently, patients were randomized to either Johrei or wait-list control. Patients received 18 Johrei sessions from a Johrei practitioner for 6 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 21 FCP patients enrolled into the Johrei group and 18 into the wait-list group. There was no difference in symptom intensity score between Johrei group and wait-list group at baseline (20.28 vs. 23.06, P = N.S.). However, there was a significant pre- and post-treatment reduction in symptom intensity in the Johrei group (20.28 vs. 7.0, P = 0.0023). There was no significant reduction in symptom intensity score between baseline and at the end of the study in the wait-list group (23.06 vs. 20.69, P = N.S.). CONCLUSION: This pilot study shows that Johrei may have a role in improving FCP symptoms; however, future studies are needed to compare Johrei treatment with sham Johrei or supportive care.

Clinical trial: acupuncture vs. doubling the proton pump inhibitor dose in refractory heartburn.

BACKGROUND: The current standard of care in proton pump inhibitor failure is to double the proton pump inhibitor dose, despite limited therapeutic gain. Aims To determine the efficacy of adding acupuncture vs. doubling the proton pump inhibitor dose in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients who failed symptomatically on proton pump inhibitors once daily. METHODS: Thirty patients with classic heartburn symptoms who continued to be symptomatic on standard-dose proton pump inhibitors were enrolled into the study. All participants underwent upper endoscopy while on proton pump inhibitors once daily. Subsequently, patients were randomized to either adding acupuncture to their proton pump inhibitor or doubling the proton pump inhibitor dose over a period of 4 weeks. Acupuncture was delivered twice a week by an expert. RESULTS: The two groups did not differ in demographic parameters. The acupuncture + proton pump inhibitor group demonstrated a significant decrease in the mean daytime heartburn, night-time heartburn and acid regurgitation scores at the end of treatment when compared with baseline, while the double-dose proton pump inhibitor group did not demonstrate a significant change in their clinical endpoints. Mean general health score was only significantly improved in the acupuncture + proton pump inhibitor group. CONCLUSION: Adding acupuncture is more effective than doubling the proton pump inhibitor dose in controlling gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related symptoms in patients who failed standard-dose proton pump inhibitors.

The effect of a therapeutic trial of high-dose rabeprazole on symptom response of patients with non-cardiac chest pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic trials with high-dose lansoprazole and omeprazole have been shown to be sensitive clinical tools for diagnosing patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain. AIM: To determine the clinical value of a therapeutic trial of high-dose rabeprazole over 7 days in detecting patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain. METHODS: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Patients referred by a cardiologist after a comprehensive cardiac work-up were enrolled into the study. Oesophageal mucosal disease was determined by upper endoscopy and 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring assessed acid exposure. Patients were then randomized to either placebo or rabeprazole 20 mg am and 20 mg pm for 7 days. After a washout period of 1 week, patients crossed over to the other arm of the study for an additional 7 days. Patients completed a daily diary assessing severity and frequency of chest pain throughout the baseline, treatment and wash-out periods. The rabeprazole therapeutic trial was considered as a diagnostic tool, if chest pain scores improved > or =50% from baseline. RESULTS: Of the 35 patients enrolled, 16 (46%) were diagnosed as gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-positive and 19 (54%) as gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-negative. Of the gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-positive patients, 12 of 16 (75%) had a significant symptom improvement on rabeprazole when compared with 3 of 16 (19%) on placebo (P = 0.029). Of the gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-negative group, only two of 19 (11%) improved significantly on the medication and four of 19 (21%) on placebo (P = 0.6599). The calculated sensitivity and specificity of the rabeprazole therapeutic trial was 75% and 90%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A rabeprazole therapeutic trial is highly sensitive and specific for diagnosing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain patients.

The effect of an empirical trial of high-dose lansoprazole on symptom response of patients with non-cardiac chest pain--a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Empirical trial with high-dose omeprazole has been shown to be a sensitive tool for diagnosing patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain. AIM: To determine the clinical value of an empirical trial of high-dose lansoprazole in detecting patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain. METHODS: Patients who were referred by a cardiologist after a comprehensive evaluation, with at least three episodes per week of unexplained chest pain as the predominant symptom, were enrolled into the study. Oesophageal mucosal disease was determined by upper endoscopy followed by 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring to assess acid exposure. Patients were then randomized to either placebo or lansoprazole 60 mg am and 30 mg pm for 7 days. After a washout period of 1 week, patients crossed over to the other arm of the study for an additional 7 days. Patients completed a daily diary assessing severity and frequency of chest pain as the predominant symptom throughout the baseline treatment and washout periods. The lansoprazole empirical trial was considered diagnostic if chest pain score improved > or =50% than baseline. RESULTS: Of the 40 patients with non-cardiac chest pain that were enrolled, 18 (45%) had erosive oesophagitis and/or abnormal pH test (gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-positive) and 22 (55%) had both tests negative (gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-negative). Of the gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-positive patients, 14 (78%) had significantly higher symptom improvement on lansoprazole than on placebo (22%) (P = 0.0143). Of the gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-negative group, two (9.1%) markedly improved on the medication and eight (36.3%) on placebo (P = 0.75). The sensitivity and specificity of the lansoprazole empirical trial was 78 and 80%, respectively. By day 2, 12 (85.7%) of the gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain responders had either complete or almost complete symptom resolution. CONCLUSIONS: The lansoprazole empirical trial is highly sensitive and specific for diagnosing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-related non-cardiac chest pain patients. The trial enables diagnosing most of the responders within the first 2 days and thus a shorter duration of therapy may be considered in a subset of non-cardiac chest pain patients.

The clinical and economic impact of competing management strategies for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder in the primary care setting. Traditional management strategies consist of sequentially intensive therapeutic trials followed by invasive diagnostic testing for nonresponders. A high dose proton pump inhibitor trial (the "proton pump inhibitor test") has been shown to be an accurate diagnostic alternative, and may be an efficient initial approach to patients with GERD symptoms. AIM: To examine the clinical, economic and policy implications of alternative management strategies for GERD. METHODS: Decision analysis was used to calculate the clinical and economic outcomes of competing management strategies. The traditional strategy incorporates sequential therapeutic trials with more intensive therapy ("step-up" approach) followed by sequential invasive diagnostic testing of nonresponders. The "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy includes an initial "proton pump inhibitor test" (7 days of omeprazole; 40 mg AM + 20 mg PM daily) followed by less intensive therapeutic trials in those testing positive ("step-down" approach) with sequential invasive diagnostic testing as needed. Cost estimates were based on Medicare reimbursement and average wholesale drug prices. Probability estimates were derived from a systematic review of the published medical literature. Model results are reported as the average and incremental cost-per-symptom free patient and cost-per-quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. RESULTS: The average cost per patient was 1045 US dollars for the traditional step-up management strategy, compared to 1172 US dollars for the "proton pump inhibitor test" and step-down strategy. The percentage of patients who were symptom-free at 1 year was 50% for the traditional management strategy compared to 75% for the "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy. The "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy results in QALY gains of 0.01-0.05 depending on the utility estimate employed. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the "proton pump inhibitor test" strategy is 510 US dollars per additional symptomatic cure over 1 year, and between 2822-10,160 US dollars per QALY gained. The traditional management strategy resulted in a greater than 5-fold increase in the utilization of upper endoscopy, which was partially offset by a 47% reduction in the use of ambulatory 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring. The reduced effectiveness of the traditional management strategy may be attributed in part to a 118% increase in the use of "high-dose" H2RAs while reducing the use of standard dose proton pump inhibitors by only 42% and "high-dose" proton pump inhibitors by 57%. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this analysis, strategies utilizing the initial PPI test followed by a "step-down" approach may result in improved symptom relief and quality of life over 1 year, and more appropriate utilization of invasive diagnostic testing at a small marginal increase in total costs. These findings warrant a prospective trial comparing these competing management strategies.

Preferential repair by squamous epithelium of thermal induced injury to the proximal stomach in patients undergoing ablation of Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND: The presence of extensions of squamous epithelium into the proximal stomach in patients undergoing routine upper endoscopy has recently been described. The factors that may favor development of squamous epithelium within the proximal stomach remain unknown. METHODS: Patients with Barrett's esophagus who agreed to undergo ablation of Barrett's epithelium by using multipolar electrocoagulation were included. Patients were treated with a high dose of a proton pump inhibitor. The columnar-appearing mucosa was systematically treated. Occasionally, thermal injury was inadvertently induced in the proximal stomach. On endoscopy performed 4 to 6 weeks after treatment, the presence of squamous epithelium extending into the proximal stomach was documented. The use of Lugol's stain assisted in confirming the squamous nature of the abnormal tissue, which was confirmed histologically by cytokeratin immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The 12 patients included in the study had a mean length of Barrett's epithelium of 3.8 +/- 0.7 cm. Patients were treated with omeprazole, mean dose 66 +/- 6.0 mg, and had a mean percent total time that the pH was less than 4 of 1.9 +/- 0.8. The mean length and width of gastric squamous extensions were 1.7 +/- 0.2 cm and 0.8 +/- 0.1 cm, respectively. None of the squamous extensions into the stomach were documented before mucosal ablation. The extensions stained positively for cytokeratin 13 and negatively for cytokeratin 8, thereby confirming their squamous nature. CONCLUSIONS: Thermal injury to the proximal stomach in patients undergoing ablation of Barrett's epithelium and profound acid suppression results in repair by squamous epithelium. Recognition of this lesion is essential because it may lead to confusion as to the location of the esophagogastric junction in subsequent endoscopic evaluations.

Failure of oesophageal acid control in candidates for Barrett's oesophagus reversal on a very high dose of proton pump inhibitor.

BACKGROUND: Normalization of oesophageal acid exposure using high dose proton pump inhibitors in patients who are candidates for ablation therapy has been suggested to be essential for successful Barrett's reversal. However, the success rate for achieving pH normalization has not been determined. METHODS: Patients with Barrett's oesophagus (2-6 cm in length) who were found to be eligible for ablation therapy using multipolar electrocoagulation were included in this prospective study. Patients underwent an upper endoscopy to determine Barrett's length and other anatomic characteristics. Biopsies were obtained to rule out dysplasia. Subsequently, patients were treated with omeprazole 40 mg b.d. Twenty-four hour oesophageal pH monitoring was performed after a mean period of 8.4 +/- 0.6 days of therapy. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled into the study. The pH test was abnormal in four (16%) of the study subjects. An additional two (8%) patients had abnormal supine percentage time with pH less than 4. There was no significant difference in oesophageal acid control between patients with long vs. short segment Barrett's oesophagus. Elderly (> 60 years) patients tended to have less acid control than younger (

The omeprazole test is as sensitive as 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring in diagnosing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in symptomatic patients with erosive oesophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring and a short course of high dose omeprazole can be used as diagnostic modalities for GERD. However, comparative studies of the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of both strategies have not been performed. AIM: To compare the omeprazole test to ambulatory 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring in diagnosing GERD in symptomatic patients using endoscopically proven erosive oesophagitis as a gold standard. METHODS: Patients with heartburn underwent an upper endoscopy. Only those with erosive oesophagitis were included in the study. Subsequently, patients underwent ambulatory 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring and an 'omeprazole test.' Daily symptoms were recorded during the first week (baseline) and repeated during the second week on therapy (omeprazole 40 mg in the morning and 20 mg in the evening). RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were included in the study. The omeprazole test was significantly more sensitive in diagnosing GERD than total acid contact time on 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring (83% vs. 60%; P < 0.03). However, the sensitivity of the pH test increased to 80% after adding patients with a positive symptom index, and patients with abnormal acid exposure in the supine or erect positions despite normal total acid contact time. Patients with a normal pH test were significantly younger (49 +/- 2.6 years) than those with abnormal test (59 +/- 1.8; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this study an omeprazole test was at least as sensitive as ambulatory 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring in diagnosing GERD in patients with erosive oesophagitis.

Empirical trials in treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

The assortment of diagnostic tests that are currently available for detecting gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are invasive, costly and not readily available to community-based physicians. In contrast, a short course of high-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) as an empirical trial is an attractive alternative. This simple diagnostic test has been demonstrated to be accurate and cost-effective in patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD and those with noncardiac chest pain. Early studies in patients with extraesophageal manifestations of GERD have yielded promising results. Cost assessment of the PPI empirical trial revealed significant cost savings, mainly due to a marked decrease in utilization of invasive diagnostic tests. Thus the PPI empirical trial should be considered as the initial diagnostic step in patients with the disease spectrum of GERD.

Clinical and economic assessment of the omeprazole test in patients with symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a trial of a high-dose proton pump inhibitor (the omeprazole test) in detecting gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients with heartburn symptoms. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. PATIENTS AND SETTING: Forty-three consecutive patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD were enrolled at a Veterans Affairs medical center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Symptom response to the omeprazole test vs placebo in GERD-positive and GERD-negative patients; sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the omeprazole test; and cost per correct diagnosis achieved with the omeprazole test compared with traditional diagnostic strategies. RESULTS: Of 42 patients (98%) who completed the study, 35 (83%) were classified as GERD positive and 7 (17%) as GERD negative. Twenty-eight GERD-positive and 3 GERD-negative patients responded to the omeprazole test, providing a sensitivity of 80.0% (95% confidence interval, 66.7%-93.3%) and a specificity of 57.1% (95% confidence interval, 20.5%-93.8%). Economic analysis revealed that the omeprazole test saves $348 per average patient evaluated, and results in a 64% reduction in the number of upper endoscopies performed and a 53% reduction in the use of pH testing. CONCLUSIONS: The omeprazole test is sensitive and fairly specific for diagnosing GERD in patients with typical GERD symptoms. This strategy could result in significant cost savings and decreased use of invasive diagnostic tests.

Correlation of ambulatory 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring results with symptom improvement in patients with noncardiac chest pain due to gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) accounts for up to 60% of patients with noncardiac chest pain (NCCP). Twenty-four-hour esophageal pH monitoring has been considered the most sensitive test for identifying acid reflux as the probable cause for chest pain. It is unclear if there is a correlation between the degree of esophageal acid exposure as determined by 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and symptom improvement during a short course of high-dose omeprazole (the omeprazole test) in patients with NCCP due to GERD. Twenty-three patients with GERD-related NCCP were studied. All patients were referred by a cardiologist and evaluated by upper endoscopy and 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring. Diagnosis of GERD was defined by one or both tests being abnormal. Subsequently, patients underwent baseline symptom intensity assessment during 1 week off therapy followed by 1 week on therapy with high-dose omeprazole (40 mg A.M. and 20 mg P.M.). There was a statistically significant correlation between the esophageal acid exposure by 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and the change in symptom intensity score after treatment. However, there was no significant correlation between the pH values and symptom intensity score during baseline or during the omeprazole test. In patients with GERD-related NCCP undergoing the omeprazole test, 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring has a therapeutic predictive value in addition to its diagnostic merit. Patients with greater esophageal acid exposure appear to have a greater response to antireflux treatment.

Increased esophageal chemoreceptor sensitivity to acid in patients after successful reversal of Barrett's esophagus.

When compared to patients with erosive esophagitis, patients with Barrett's esophagus have demonstrated reduced chemo- and mechanoreceptor sensitivity to acid infusion and balloon distension, respectively. However, anecdotal clinical experience suggested an increase in symptom perception in patients after successful elimination of Barrett's epithelium, using multipolar electrocoagulation (MPEC) and high-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI). To determine perception thresholds to acid infusion, we evaluated eight consecutive patients after a series of MPEC treatments resulted in complete elimination of Barrett's mucosa and compared them to 10 age-matched patients with nonreversed Barrett's esophagus and 10 patients with symptomatic, endoscopy-documented erosive esophagitis (Hetzel-Dent grade 2 or greater). Chemosensitivity was determined by a modified acid perfusion test, where acid perception thresholds were quantified by the lag time to initial typical symptom perception, sensory intensity rating, and an acid perfusion sensory score (APSS). While patients after successful elimination of Barrett's esophagus had similar sensory intensity ratings and APSS as patients with erosive esophagitis, the lag times differed significantly between the groups, and both groups had significantly higher sensory intensity ratings and APSS than patients with nonreversed Barrett's esophagus. In conclusion, patients after complete reversal of Barrett's mucosa are unexpectedly as sensitive to acid as symptomatic patients with erosive esophagitis.

The safety and efficacy of combination N-butyl-deoxynojirimycin (SC-48334) and zidovudine in patients with HIV-1 infection and 200-500 CD4 cells/mm3.

We conducted a double-blind, randomized phase II study to evaluate the safety and activity of combination therapy with N-butyl-deoxynojirimycin (SC-48334) (an alpha-glucosidase I inhibitor) and zidovudine versus zidovudine alone. Patients with 200 to 500 CD4 cells/mm3 who tolerated < or = 12 weeks of prior zidovudine therapy received SC-48334 (1000 mg every 8 h) and zidovudine (100 mg every 8 h) or zidovudine and placebo. Sixty patients received combination therapy and 58, zidovudine and placebo. Twenty-three patients (38%) and 15 (26%), in the combination and zidovudine groups, respectively, discontinued therapy (p = 0.15). The mean SC-48334 steady-state trough level (4.04 +/- 0.99 micrograms/ml) was below the in vitro inhibitory concentration for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The mean increase in CD4 cells at week 4 was 73.8 cells/mm3 and 52.4 cells/mm3 for the combination and zidovudine groups, respectively (p > 0.36). For patients with prior zidovudine therapy, the mean change in CD4 cells in the combination and zidovudine groups was 63.7 cells/mm3 and 4.9 cells/mm3 at week 8 and 6.8 cells/mm3 and -45.1 cells/mm3 at week 16, respectively. The number of patients with suppression of HIV p24 antigenemia in the combination and zidovudine groups was six (40%) and two (11%) at week 4 (p = 0.10) and five (45%) and two (14%) at week 24 (p = 0.08), respectively. Diarrhea, flatulence, abdominal pain, and weight loss were common for combination recipients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Fatal hyperphosphatemia following Fleet Phospo-Soda in a patient with colonic ileus.

A fatal case of hyperphosphatemia secondary to enteral administration of Fleet Phospo-Soda is presented. A 64-yr-old male admitted for theophylline toxicity was treated with activated charcoal and sorbitol, but subsequently developed colonic ileus. Two sequential doses of Phospo-Soda were administered to facilitate clearance of the charcoal; however, this resulted in marked hyperphosphatemia, hypocalcemia, acidemia, and other electrolyte abnormalities, followed by the patient's demise. This case is added to several other reports about the risks of injudicious use of sodium phosphate cathartics.

Comparison of oral fluconazole and clotrimazole troches as treatment for oral candidiasis in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus.

Thirty-nine adult patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection and oral candidiasis were randomly assigned to receive either one fluconazole capsule (100 mg) or five clotrimazole troches (10 mg each) daily for 14 days. Among 36 evaluable patients, clinical resolution rates were 100 and 65%, respectively (P = 0.018). Mycological eradication rates were 75 and 20%, respectively (P = 0.004). Fluconazole-treated patients were more likely to remain disease free during follow-up than those treated with clotrimazole (P = 0.014 at 2 weeks). Prolonged clinical responses correlated with mycological eradication at the end of therapy (P = 0.043).

Ciprofloxacin. Best use of this new broad-spectrum antibiotic.

Resistance to traditional antibiotics is an increasing problem. The introduction of ciprofloxacin (Cipro) has been welcome, because it is safe and effective against many organisms (including drug-resistant ones), can be taken orally, and is well tolerated. Dr Fass provides a complete description of the drug, including its use for infections of the urinary, respiratory, and gastrointestinal tracts; skin and skin structures; and bones and joints.

Intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin versus ceftazidime in the treatment of serious infections.

Seventy-one adult patients with 72 infections were treated, by random selection, with intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin or intravenously administered ceftazidime. Twenty-seven additional patients with 29 infections who were not appropriate for random assignment were treated in an open study with intravenously administered ciprofloxacin only; the latter infections were generally more serious or were caused by ceftazidime-resistant organisms. The most common doses were ciprofloxacin, 200 mg intravenously and 500 mg orally every 12 hours and ceftazidime, 1 to 2 g intravenously every eight to 12 hours. Forty-seven ciprofloxacin-treated infections and 31 ceftazidime-treated infections were evaluable for determination of efficacy. Infections included lower respiratory tract (21 infections), urinary (37 infections), skin/soft tissue (14 infections), bacteremia/endocarditis (four infections), colitis (one infection), and mastoiditis (one infection). Median minimal inhibitory concentrations of ciprofloxacin and ceftazidime were, respectively: for Enterobacteriaceae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Branhamella catarrhalis, no more than 0.06 and no more than 0.25 micrograms/ml; for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 0.25 and 4 micrograms/ml; for Enterococcus faecalis, 1 and more than 32 micrograms/ml; and for Staphylococcus aureus, 0.25 and 8 micrograms/ml. Ciprofloxacin, 200 mg intravenously, yielded mean serum concentrations 0.5 and eight hours post-intravenous infusion of 2.3 and 0.7 micrograms/ml, respectively. Satisfactory clinical responses were achieved in 17 (81 percent) of 21 patients with intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin, 22 (71 percent) of 31 patients with ceftazidime, and 20 (77 percent) of 26 patients with intravenous ciprofloxacin. The most common treatment failures occurred in complicated skin/soft-tissue infections treated with intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin, complicated urinary tract infections treated with ceftazidime, and necrotizing P. aeruginosa pneumonia treated with intravenous ciprofloxacin; the pneumonia patients all had respiratory failure and had been previously unresponsive to treatment with other appropriate drugs. Serious adverse reactions were observed in three patients, seizures with intravenous ciprofloxacin in two patients, and Clostridium difficile diarrhea with ceftazidime in one patient. We conclude that sequential intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin and ceftazidime were comparable in efficacy and safety; the ability to change from intravenous to oral therapy is a major convenience. Intravenous ciprofloxacin was useful for more serious infections, often caused by ceftazidime-resistant organisms.