Comparison of intravenous/oral ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intraabdominal infections

S. M. Cohn, Pamela A Lipsett, T. G. Buchman, W. G. Cheadle, J. W. Milsom, S. O'Marro, A. E. Yellin, S. Jungerwirth, E. V. Rochefort, D. C. Haverstock, S. F. Kowalsky, D. Haas, S. Wilson, S. Vogel, F. Chang, J. Van De Water, P. Lipsett, R. Durham, G. Gaber, O. RotsteinD. Neal, J. Jemsek, W. Cheadle, L. Rumans, M. Salem, J. Milsom, P. Gordon, S. Hamilton, D. Gubler, T. Buchman, C. Terregino, J. Hebert, S. O'Marro, R. Stewart, M. Metzler, M. Malangoni, D. Fry, R. Schwartz, A. Yellin, T. Berne, P. Heseltine, M. Appleman, P. Krumpe, R. Johnston, R. Hall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) ciprofloxacin plus IV metronidazole (CIP+MET) with that of IV piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP/TAZO) in adults with complicated intraabdominal infections, and to compare the efficacy of sequential IV-to-oral CIP+MET therapy with that of the IV CIP-only regimen. Summary Background Data: Treatment of intraabdominal infections remains a challenge, mainly because of their polymicrobial etiology and attendant death and complications. Antimicrobial regimens using sequential IV-to-oral therapy may reduce the length of hospital stay. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial involving 459 patients, clinically improved IV-treated patients were switched to oral therapy after 48 hours. Overall clinical response was the primary efficacy measurement. Results: A total of 282 patients (151 CIP+MET, 131 PIP/TAZO) were valid for efficacy. Of these patients, 64% CIP+MET and 57% PIP/TAZO patients were considered candidates for oral therapy. Patients had a mean APACHE II score of 9.6. The most common diagnoses were appendicitis (33%), other intraabdominal infection (29%), and abscess (25%). Overall clinical resolution rates were statistically superior for CIP+MET (74%) compared with PIP/TAZO (63%). Corresponding rates in the subgroup suitable for oral therapy were 85% for CIP+MET and 70% for PIP/TAZO. Postsurgical wound infection rates were significantly lower in CIP+MET (11%) versus PIP/TAZO patients (19%). Mean length of stay was 14 days for CIP+MET and 17 days for PIP/TAZO patients. Conclusion: CIP+MET, initially administered IV and followed by CIP+MET oral therapy, was clinically more effective than IV PIP/TAZO for the treatment of patients with complicated intraabdominal infections.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)254-262
Number of pages9
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Volume232
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this