Cargando…
Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of trospectomycin sulfate with that of clindamycin phosphate, both with aztreonam, for the treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. Methods: In a double-blind, multicenter, prospective randomized study, 57...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
1997
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2364549/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18476152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/S1064744997000483 |
_version_ | 1782153981361913856 |
---|---|
author | Chatwani, Ashwin Martens, Mark Blanco, Jorge Gall, Stanley Przybylko, Kira Wajszczuk, Charles P. Nickens, Dana |
author_facet | Chatwani, Ashwin Martens, Mark Blanco, Jorge Gall, Stanley Przybylko, Kira Wajszczuk, Charles P. Nickens, Dana |
author_sort | Chatwani, Ashwin |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of trospectomycin sulfate with that of clindamycin phosphate, both with aztreonam, for the treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. Methods: In a double-blind, multicenter, prospective randomized study, 579 patients with either endometritis following cesarean delivery or pelvic cellulitis following hysterectomy were enrolled and received medication. Administered was either trospectomycin sulfate 500 mg IV every 8 h or clindamycin phosphate 900 mg IV every 8 h in a 1:1 randomization ratio. Both groups of patients received aztreonam 1 g IV every 8 h. The patients were followed for clinical responses and side effects. Results: The cure rate for the trospectomycin sulfate arm was 91.8% and for clindamycin phosphate arm it was 88.4% (P = 0.218). The adverse events were similar in both groups. Conclusions: Trospectomycin was as effective as clindamycin, when both were combined with aztreonam, in treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2364549 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 1997 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-23645492008-05-12 Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections Chatwani, Ashwin Martens, Mark Blanco, Jorge Gall, Stanley Przybylko, Kira Wajszczuk, Charles P. Nickens, Dana Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol Research Article Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of trospectomycin sulfate with that of clindamycin phosphate, both with aztreonam, for the treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. Methods: In a double-blind, multicenter, prospective randomized study, 579 patients with either endometritis following cesarean delivery or pelvic cellulitis following hysterectomy were enrolled and received medication. Administered was either trospectomycin sulfate 500 mg IV every 8 h or clindamycin phosphate 900 mg IV every 8 h in a 1:1 randomization ratio. Both groups of patients received aztreonam 1 g IV every 8 h. The patients were followed for clinical responses and side effects. Results: The cure rate for the trospectomycin sulfate arm was 91.8% and for clindamycin phosphate arm it was 88.4% (P = 0.218). The adverse events were similar in both groups. Conclusions: Trospectomycin was as effective as clindamycin, when both were combined with aztreonam, in treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 1997 /pmc/articles/PMC2364549/ /pubmed/18476152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/S1064744997000483 Text en Copyright © 1997 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chatwani, Ashwin Martens, Mark Blanco, Jorge Gall, Stanley Przybylko, Kira Wajszczuk, Charles P. Nickens, Dana Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections |
title | Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections |
title_full | Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections |
title_fullStr | Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections |
title_full_unstemmed | Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections |
title_short | Double-Blind, Multicenter, Prospective Randomized Study of Trospectomycin Vs. Clindamycin, Both With Aztreonam, in Non-Community Acquired Obstetric and Gynecologic Infections |
title_sort | double-blind, multicenter, prospective randomized study of trospectomycin vs. clindamycin, both with aztreonam, in non-community acquired obstetric and gynecologic infections |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2364549/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18476152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/S1064744997000483 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chatwaniashwin doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections AT martensmark doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections AT blancojorge doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections AT gallstanley doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections AT przybylkokira doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections AT wajszczukcharlesp doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections AT nickensdana doubleblindmulticenterprospectiverandomizedstudyoftrospectomycinvsclindamycinbothwithaztreonaminnoncommunityacquiredobstetricandgynecologicinfections |