Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Ampicillin plus mecillinam vs. cefotaxime/cefadroxil treatment of patients with severe pneumonia or pyelonephritis: a double-blind multicentre study evaluated by intention-to-treat analysis.

Author: BankeS, BrunoA M, CarlssonM, CronbergS, ElmrudH, ElowssonS, JosefssonK, LindholmA C, MonteliusH, NeringerR

Clinical TrialA clinical trial is a planned study conducted on humans to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and treatment methods. It aims to explore the possibilities of new treatments and improve the health of patients.
Comparative StudyResearch that compares multiple groups/interventions to determine differences/similarities in outcomes/characteristics.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Multicenter StudyResearch conducted in collaboration with multiple research institutions. It aims to collect a wide range of data and obtain more generalizable results.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch funding provided by government agencies outside the United States.

Overview

Ampicillin and mecillinam (A+M) were as effective as cefotaxime followed by cefadroxil in treating febrile patients with sepsis and signs of pneumonia or pyelonephritis. However, both treatment groups had a high rate of treatment failure. Side effects were reported in 22% of patients in the A+M group and 28% in the cephalosporin group.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
In this double-blind multicentre study, using the intention-to-treat approach, a total of 293 patients with fever (> or = 38.5 degrees C), symptoms of sepsis and signs of pneumonia or pyelonephritis were randomly assigned to treatment with ampicillin and mecillinam (A+M) or cefotaxime followed by ce...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://doi.org/10.3109/00365549509047047

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Comparing Ampicillin Plus Mecillinam to Cefotaxime/Cefadroxil for Severe Pneumonia or Pyelonephritis

Pneumonia and pyelonephritis, serious infections affecting the lungs and kidneys, require prompt and effective treatment. This double-blind, multicenter study compared the efficacy and safety of two antibiotic regimens: ampicillin plus mecillinam (A+M) and cefotaxime followed by cefadroxil.

Antibiotic Effectiveness and Safety

The study included 293 patients with fever, symptoms of sepsis, and signs of pneumonia or pyelonephritis. While both regimens demonstrated efficacy in treating these infections, the A+M group exhibited a higher frequency of exanthema (skin rash) compared to the cephalosporin group, which had a higher incidence of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and fungal superinfections. It's like choosing the right camel for a desert journey – each breed has its strengths and weaknesses, and the best choice depends on the specific challenges you face.

Patient-Centered Care

The study highlights the importance of individualizing treatment decisions based on patient-specific factors, such as allergies, previous antibiotic use, and potential side effects. It's a reminder that treating patients is an art as much as a science, requiring both technical expertise and a deep understanding of individual needs. Think of it as navigating a sandstorm – you must choose the right path, use appropriate tools, and be adaptable to changing conditions.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

This study provides valuable insights into the comparative effectiveness and safety of different antibiotic regimens for treating severe pneumonia and pyelonephritis. It reinforces the importance of individualized patient care, considering a patient's specific characteristics and potential risks when making treatment decisions. It's a reminder that the art of medicine involves not just treating diseases, but also considering the unique needs and vulnerabilities of each individual patient.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 1996-03-27
  2. Date Revised 2022-03-17
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

8588136

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

10.3109/00365549509047047

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.