An open-label prospective, randomized, parallel multicentre study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 1.5 g/day intravenous imipenem/cilastatin with 3 g/day intravenous meropenem in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections, A total of 287 patients mere enrolled; 201 patients, divided between the 2 treatment groups, were evaluable. Clinical outcome, bacteriological outcome, untoward microbiological effects, and clinical and laboratory adverse experiences mere evaluated, 98% of patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin therapy mere cured, with 96% showing eradication of infection, 95% of those on meropenem mere cured, with 98% showing eradication. These differences in clinical and bacteriological outcome between the 2 treatments were not statistically significant, Two patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin and 5 receiving meropenem had untoward microbiological effects. There mas a 0.7% frequency (1/139 patients) of possibly or probably drug-related clinical or laboratory adverse experiences with imipenem/cilastatin and a 2.7% frequency (4/148) with meropenem, The mean time to defervescence was significantly less for patients in the imipenem/cilastatin treatment group than for those receiving meropenem. This study shows that 1.5 g/day of imipenem/cilastatin is equivalent to 3.0 g/day meropenem in clinical and bacteriological outcome, as well as in incidence of side effects.

Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 g daily) versus meropenem (3.0 g daily) in patients with intra-abdominal infections: Results of a prospective, randomized, multicentre trial / Basoli, Antonio; Chirletti, Piero; Paolo, Mazzocchi; Vincenzo, Speranza; E., Lezoche; M., Guerrieri; D., Marrano; F., Minni; S. M., Giulini; F., Nodari; G., Brotzu; P., Loddo; F., Latteri; Scuderi, Gianluca; G., Rodolico; L., Cavallaro; I., Donini; A., Sortini; F., Tonelli; S., Spini; C., Natale; V., Musto; A., Vio; G., Verdecchia; D., Morgagni; L., Mariani; A., Montefusco; E., Gerosa; G., Tiberio; A., Nardone; F., Mazzeo; G., Benassai; D., D'Amico; A., Tropea; M., Piervittori; S., Becelli; M., Cazzaniga; F., Stagnitti; F., Crucitti; F., Pacelli; A., Gargiulo; Panichi, Giovanni; DI ROSA, Roberta; R., Porzio; U., Lombardi; V., Stipa; P., Chirletti; D., De Anna; I., Pisano; S., Armenio; E., Salvestrini; A., Baglioni; G., Iafrate; F., Donadio; L., Paron; A., Saccia; P., Di Girolamo. - In: SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. - ISSN 0036-5548. - STAMPA. - 29:5(1997), pp. 503-508. [10.3109/00365549709011863]

Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 g daily) versus meropenem (3.0 g daily) in patients with intra-abdominal infections: Results of a prospective, randomized, multicentre trial

BASOLI, Antonio;Emanuele Zarba Meli;PANICHI, Giovanni;DI ROSA, Roberta;
1997

Abstract

An open-label prospective, randomized, parallel multicentre study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 1.5 g/day intravenous imipenem/cilastatin with 3 g/day intravenous meropenem in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections, A total of 287 patients mere enrolled; 201 patients, divided between the 2 treatment groups, were evaluable. Clinical outcome, bacteriological outcome, untoward microbiological effects, and clinical and laboratory adverse experiences mere evaluated, 98% of patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin therapy mere cured, with 96% showing eradication of infection, 95% of those on meropenem mere cured, with 98% showing eradication. These differences in clinical and bacteriological outcome between the 2 treatments were not statistically significant, Two patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin and 5 receiving meropenem had untoward microbiological effects. There mas a 0.7% frequency (1/139 patients) of possibly or probably drug-related clinical or laboratory adverse experiences with imipenem/cilastatin and a 2.7% frequency (4/148) with meropenem, The mean time to defervescence was significantly less for patients in the imipenem/cilastatin treatment group than for those receiving meropenem. This study shows that 1.5 g/day of imipenem/cilastatin is equivalent to 3.0 g/day meropenem in clinical and bacteriological outcome, as well as in incidence of side effects.
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 g daily) versus meropenem (3.0 g daily) in patients with intra-abdominal infections: Results of a prospective, randomized, multicentre trial / Basoli, Antonio; Chirletti, Piero; Paolo, Mazzocchi; Vincenzo, Speranza; E., Lezoche; M., Guerrieri; D., Marrano; F., Minni; S. M., Giulini; F., Nodari; G., Brotzu; P., Loddo; F., Latteri; Scuderi, Gianluca; G., Rodolico; L., Cavallaro; I., Donini; A., Sortini; F., Tonelli; S., Spini; C., Natale; V., Musto; A., Vio; G., Verdecchia; D., Morgagni; L., Mariani; A., Montefusco; E., Gerosa; G., Tiberio; A., Nardone; F., Mazzeo; G., Benassai; D., D'Amico; A., Tropea; M., Piervittori; S., Becelli; M., Cazzaniga; F., Stagnitti; F., Crucitti; F., Pacelli; A., Gargiulo; Panichi, Giovanni; DI ROSA, Roberta; R., Porzio; U., Lombardi; V., Stipa; P., Chirletti; D., De Anna; I., Pisano; S., Armenio; E., Salvestrini; A., Baglioni; G., Iafrate; F., Donadio; L., Paron; A., Saccia; P., Di Girolamo. - In: SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. - ISSN 0036-5548. - STAMPA. - 29:5(1997), pp. 503-508. [10.3109/00365549709011863]
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/484417
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 7
  • Scopus 44
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 33
social impact