A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of infra-abdominal infections

Luis E. Jauregui, Peter C. Appelbaum, Timothy Fabian, George Hageage, Larry Strausbaugh, Louis F. Martin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

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 < 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)423-433
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Volume25
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 1990

Fingerprint

Cefoperazone
Sulbactam
Clindamycin
Gentamicins
Infection
Intraabdominal Infections
Therapeutics
Safety
Aminoglycosides
Clinical Studies
Abscess
Research Personnel

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)
  • Pharmacology
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of infra-abdominal infections. / Jauregui, Luis E.; Appelbaum, Peter C.; Fabian, Timothy; Hageage, George; Strausbaugh, Larry; Martin, Louis F.

In: Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Vol. 25, No. 3, 01.03.1990, p. 423-433.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jauregui, Luis E. ; Appelbaum, Peter C. ; Fabian, Timothy ; Hageage, George ; Strausbaugh, Larry ; Martin, Louis F. / A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of infra-abdominal infections. In: Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 1990 ; Vol. 25, No. 3. pp. 423-433.
@article{d16cf39965ba42c1ba744227f94caec6,
title = "A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of infra-abdominal infections",
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 < 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.",
author = "Jauregui, {Luis E.} and Appelbaum, {Peter C.} and Timothy Fabian and George Hageage and Larry Strausbaugh and Martin, {Louis F.}",
year = "1990",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/jac/25.3.423",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "423--433",
journal = "Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy",
issn = "0305-7453",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized clinical study of cefoperazone and sulbactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the treatment of infra-abdominal infections

AU - Jauregui, Luis E.

AU - Appelbaum, Peter C.

AU - Fabian, Timothy

AU - Hageage, George

AU - Strausbaugh, Larry

AU - Martin, Louis F.

PY - 1990/3/1

Y1 - 1990/3/1

N2 - 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 < 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.

AB - 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 < 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025248077&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025248077&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/jac/25.3.423

DO - 10.1093/jac/25.3.423

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 423

EP - 433

JO - Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

JF - Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

SN - 0305-7453

IS - 3

ER -