Randomized comparative study of ampicillin/sulbactam vs. ceftriaxone for treatment of soft tissue and skeletal infections in children

Rational antibiotic therapy and the position of ampicillin/sulbactam

“…Dajani [17] and Kanra [87] provide detailed summaries of these studies. AMS and ceftriaxone had equivalent clinical and bacteriological efficacy for the treatment of suppurative arthritis, osteomyelitis or cellulitis (100% vs. 93%) [95]; a similar clinical cure rate was observed with sultamicillin and cloxacillin in patients with superficial SSTIs (76% vs. 62%) [96].…”

Systematic review of duration and choice of systemic antibiotic therapy for acute haematogenous bacterial osteomyelitis in children

“…One randomised controlled trial enrolled only nine osteomyelitis patients (among 105 patients in total with a range of infections) . These patients were randomised to receive either ampicillin‐sulbactam or ceftriaxone for 7–10 days parenterally followed by 3–5 weeks orally.…”

Prospective evaluation of the management of moderate to severe cellulitis with parenteral antibiotics at a paediatric day treatment centre

“…The main disadvantage with this third‐generation cephalosporin is its wide spectrum of activity that is not usually necessary for the treatment of cellulitis; moreover, its activity against S. aureus is not as good as that of cloxacillin or a first‐generation cephalosporin. Despite these limits, studies have demonstrated the efficacy of ceftriaxone in the management of soft‐tissue infections in children 6–8 . In these series, clinical response was satisfactory in 96–100% of cases, 6–8 and a bacteriologic cure of 97–100% was reported 6–8 .…”

“…Despite these limits, studies have demonstrated the efficacy of ceftriaxone in the management of soft‐tissue infections in children 6–8 . In these series, clinical response was satisfactory in 96–100% of cases, 6–8 and a bacteriologic cure of 97–100% was reported 6–8 . S. aureus was the pathogen responsible for most of these infections 6–8 .…”