Comparison of Ceftriaxone with Cefotaxime in Serious Chest Infections

Reeves, John H.; Russell, Gary M.; Cade, J. F.; McDonald, Malcolm

doi:10.1378/chest.96.6.1292

Cited by 26 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As we studied 87% of patients admitted during one year under the care of participating consultants (that is, 70% of all admissions with the appropriate diagnosis), the sample was highly representative. The severity of illness among patients in the three groups was comparable (table I) and the outcome consonant with that in other studies of respiratory tract infection 14 15…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Oral versus intravenous antibiotics for community acquired lower respiratory tract infection in a general hospital: open, randomised controlled trial

Chan

Hemeryck

O’Regan³

et al. 1995

BMJ

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key messages * Osteoporosis is a disease characterised by low bone mineral density, 80% of which is under genetic control * Vitamin D has an important role in the metabolism of calcium and bone, mediated through its receptor * Common variants of the vitamin D receptor gene are responsible for 7-10% of the difference in bone density between women after the menopause * This genetic marker is important because of its potential role in identifying individual women at increased risk of fracture before menopause and in selecting optimal treatment selecting optimal treatment based on the understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms. Because of discrepancies between population groups, further studies are needed, with larger sample sizes that include a range of ages in both men and women. The demonstration of the effect of these common vitamin D receptor genotypes on bone mineral density in a second, geographically distinct population of older and postmenopausal women opens the way to a wide range of studies to provide novel approaches to the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Design-Open controlled trial in patients admitted consecutively and randomised to treatment with either oral co-amoxiclav, intravenous followed by oral co-amoxiclav, or intravenous followed by oral cephalosporins.Setting-Large general hospital in Dublin. Patients-541 patients admitted for lower respiratory tract infection during one year. Patients represented 87% of admissions with the diagnosis and excluded those who were immunocompromised and patients with severe life threatening infection.Main outcome measures-Cure, partial cure, extended antibiotic treatment, change of antibiotic, death, and cost and duration ofhospital stay.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Oral versus intravenous antibiotics for community acquired lower respiratory tract infection in a general hospital: open, randomised controlled trial

Chan

Hemeryck

O’Regan³

et al. 1995

BMJ

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Response rates for the various cephalosporins were in the range of 65% to 85% in most studies, except for slightly lower response rates for ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in two smaller studies (101,104).…”

Section: Single-agent Antibiotic Therapiesmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…In summary, as one might have anticipated given the fairly comparable antimicrobial spectrum of activity of most third-generation and fourth-generation cephalosporins, the studies conducted with these agents for the treatment of patients with severe sepsis and community-acquired or nosocomial (including ventilator-associated) pneumonia or miscellaneous types of infections have yielded very comparable results (Table 2) (91,93,94,98,(101)(102)(103)(104)108). Response rates for the various cephalosporins were in the range of 65% to 85% in most studies, except for slightly lower response rates for ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in two smaller studies (101,104).…”

Section: Single-agent Antibiotic Therapiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Antimicrobial therapy for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: An evidence-based review

Bochud

Bonten

Marchetti

et al. 2004

Critical Care Medicine

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the prompt institution of therapy that is active against the causative pathogen is one of the most important predictors of outcome, clinicians must establish a system for rapid administration of a rationally chosen drug or combination of drugs when sepsis or septic shock is suspected. The expanding number of antibacterial, antifungal, and antiviral agents available provides opportunities for effective empiric and specific therapy. However, to minimize the promotion of antimicrobial resistance and cost and to maximize efficacy, detailed knowledge of the likely pathogens and the properties of the available drugs is necessary for the intensivist.

show abstract

“…85 This was also the case when analysis was restricted to the nine studies including patients treated for HAP. [93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101] Comparable conclusions were gleaned from a meta-analysis evaluating 7856 septic patients included in 64 prospective randomized trials, comparing b-lactam monotherapies with combinations of b-lactams and aminoglycosides. 102 In this evaluation, which comprised at least 1200 patients with HAP, no differences were found in mortality (OR 0.9, 95% CI: 0.77-1.06), whether the b-lactam used was the same or different in the comparative arms (OR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.76-1.38 vs OR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.69-1.05, respectively).…”

Section: Broadening Of the Spectrummentioning

confidence: 99%

Should Antibiotic Combinations Be Used to Treat Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia?

Eggimann

Revelly²

2006

Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review summarizes the rationale for using or not using combinations of antibiotics to treat ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Patients suffering from VAP require empirical antibiotic treatment before the identification of an etiologic agent. Most treatment failures are related to inappropriate initial antibiotic treatment with insufficient coverage of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens. Guidelines require initial (empirical) treatment of VAP with a combination of antibiotics. However, this contributes to overexposure to antibiotics and further emergence of MDR microorganisms. We review the rationale for using combinations of antibiotics to cover MDR gram-negatives. However, clinical data supporting this strategy are limited. In fact, systematic combination therapy may have contributed to the overuse of antibiotics and to the emergence of MDR microorganisms. Nevertheless, combination therapy is our best strategy to treat severe infections due to suspected MDR microorganisms. Optimally, therapeutic strategies should be sufficiently broad to cover relevant pathogens while minimizing the risk for emergence of antimicrobial resistance.

show abstract

Comparison of Ceftriaxone with Cefotaxime in Serious Chest Infections

Cited by 26 publications

References 11 publications

Oral versus intravenous antibiotics for community acquired lower respiratory tract infection in a general hospital: open, randomised controlled trial

Oral versus intravenous antibiotics for community acquired lower respiratory tract infection in a general hospital: open, randomised controlled trial

Antimicrobial therapy for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: An evidence-based review

Should Antibiotic Combinations Be Used to Treat Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About