Prospective randomized comparison of imipenem/cilastatin and cefotaxime for treatment of lung, soft tissue, and renal infections

Treatment of severe nosocomial pneumonia: a prospective randomised comparison of intravenous ciprofloxacin with imipenem/cilastatin

BACKGROUND

A prospective multicentre study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of intravenous ciprofloxacin or imipenem in the treatment of severe nosocomial pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

Patients with a clinical suspicion of pneumonia were randomised to receive either ciprofloxacin (800-1200 mg/day) or imipenem (2-4 g/day) in doses adjusted for renal function and specimens of the lower respiratory tract were taken. Patients were included in the study when specimens showed significant growth for potentially pathogenic microorganisms in quantitative bacterial cultures (n = 75, ciprofloxacin 41/75 (55%); imipenem 34/75 (45%)). The clinical and bacteriological success rates were the primary and secondary efficacy variables. An intent-to-treat analysis was performed for all randomised patients who received at least one dose of the study medication (n = 149, ciprofloxacin 72/149 (48%), imipenem 77/149 (52%)).

RESULTS

The success rates were generally good, but neither the clinical success rates (ciprofloxacin, 29/41 (71%), imipenem, 27/34 (79%); 95% CI -10.8 to 28.1; p = 0.435) nor the bacteriological response rate (ciprofloxacin, 20/41 (49%), imipenem, 17/34 (50%); 95% CI -21.5 to 23.9; p = 1.0) were significantly different between the study arms. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was recovered in 26/75 patients (35%) and clinical (ciprofloxacin, 10/14 (71%), imipenem, 8/12 (67%); 95% CI -40.4 to 30.9; p = 1.0) and bacteriological response rates (ciprofloxacin, 7/14 (50%), imipenem, 3/12 (25%), 95% CI -60.9 to 10.9, p = 0.247) were not significantly different in this subgroup of patients. Resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa developed in 5/26 cases (19%), 1/14 (7%) to ciprofloxacin and 4/12 (33%) to imipenem (p = 0.147), and the mortality was 12/75 (16%) with no difference between treatment groups (ciprofloxacin, 8/41(24%), imipenem 4/34 (17%); p = 0.362). The clinical response was evaluable in 109/149 patients (73%) in the intent-to-treat analysis and was successful in 74/109 patients (68%). The clinical response rates were also not significantly different in the intent-to-treat analysis (ciprofloxacin, 34/52 (65%), imipenem, 40/57 (70%); 95% CI -12.8 to 22.3; p = 0.746).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with either ciprofloxacin or imipenem was effective in a selected group of patients with microbiologically confirmed, severe nosocomial pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation. Although no differences between the study medication could be documented in this trial, smaller differences between treatment arms may have been missed because of sample size limitations.

Microbiological and clinical aspects of infection associated with Stenotrophomonas maltophilia

The gram-negative bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is increasingly recognized as an important cause of nosocomial infection. Infection occurs principally, but not exclusively, in debilitated and immunosuppressed individuals. Management of S. maltophilia-associated infection is problematic because many strains of the bacterium manifest resistance to multiple antibiotics. These difficulties are compounded by methodological problems in in vitro susceptibility testing for which there are, as yet, no formal guidelines. Despite its acknowledged importance as a nosocomial pathogen, little is known of the epidemiology of S. maltophilia, and although it is considered an environmental bacterium, its sources and reservoirs are often not readily apparent. Molecular typing systems may contribute to our knowledge of the epidemiology of S. maltophilia infection, thus allowing the development of strategies to interrupt the transmission of the bacterium in the hospital setting. Even less is known of pathogenic mechanisms and putative virulence factors involved in the natural history of S. maltophilia infection and this, coupled with difficulties in distinguishing colonization from true infection, has fostered the view that the bacterium is essentially nonpathogenic. This article aims to review the current taxonomic status of S. maltophilia, and it discusses the laboratory identification of the bacterium. The epidemiology of the organism is considered with particular reference to nosocomial outbreaks, several of which have been investigated by molecular typing techniques. Risk factors for acquisition of the bacterium are also reviewed, and the ever-expanding spectrum of clinical syndromes associated with S. maltophilia is surveyed. Antimicrobial resistance mechanisms, pitfalls in in vitro susceptibility testing, and therapy of S. maltophilia infections are also discussed.

A prospective randomized trial of imipenem-cilastatin versus clindamycin/tobramycin in the treatment of intra-abdominal and pelvic infections

OBJECTIVE

A Canadian multicentre clinical trial in the treatment of intra-abdominal and pelvic infections to compare the efficacy and safety of monotherapy using imipenem-cilastatin (imipenem) (500 mg intravenously every 6 h) versus combination therapy with clindamycin/tobramycin (clindamycin 600 mg intravenously every 6 h and tobramycin 1.7 mg/kg intravenously every 8 h).

METHODS

Two hundred and fifty patients were entered (88 definite and 162 possible infections) and all were evaluable for analysis of adverse events and intention to treat analysis of efficacy. Dichotomous outcomes used were: cured versus noncured (improved, failed, relapsed).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found with the intention to treat analysis (P=0.88) or with definite infections (P=0.81). For overall bacteriological response, no significant differences were noted (P=0.1). Eleven and 15 patients on imipenem and clindamycin/tobramycin, respectively, were colonized with bacteria. Enterococci colonized four of 11 imipenem cases and five of 15 clindamycin/tobramycin cases while fungi colonized six patients on imipenem and four on clindamycin/tobramycin. Five patients on imipenem and seven on clindamycin/tobramycin developed superinfection. In the imipenem group, one case had a bacterial superinfection while four cases were due to Candida albicans. Seven of seven superinfections on clindamycin/tobramycin were bacterial. Three bacteria initially sensitive to the assigned study drug developed resistance. In two patients on imipenem, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa became resistant after 14 and 10 days of therapy, respectively. On clindamycin/tobramycin, one instance of Bacteroides fragilis resistance after eight days of therapy was seen. Eighty-three adverse events occurred; 47 in the imipenem group and 36 in the clindamycin/tobramycin group. This resulted in discontinuation of antibacterial therapy in 13 patients, seven of whom were on imipenem and six on clindamycin/tobramycin. Comparison of adverse effects showed statistically significant differences for nausea (P=0.02) and hepatotoxicity (P=0.05) occurring with greater frequency in the imipenem and clindamycin/tobramycin groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the conclusion that monotherapy with imipenem (500 mg intravenously every 6 h) is as efficacious as clindamycin/tobramycin for treatment of intra-abdominal and pelvic infections. Both regimens are well tolerated.

Imipenem

Imipenem is the first of a new class of beta-lactam antibiotics, the carbapenems, to be released for clinical use. It has the broadest antibacterial activity of all antibiotics available for systemic use in humans. It is active against streptococci, methicillin-sensitive staphylococci, Neisseria, Haemophilus, anaerobes, and the common aerobic gram-negative nosocomial pathogens including Pseudomonas. Resistance to imipenem may emerge during treatment of P. aeruginosa infections, as has occurred with other beta-lactam agents; P. maltophilia and P. cepacia are typically resistant to it. Like the penicillins, imipenem has inhibitory activity against enterococci. Daily doses may range from 500 mg to 1 g, every 6 to 8 hours, in patients with normal renal function. The principal toxic effects have been nausea and vomiting, which occur during intravenous infusion, and seizures, which develop in 1 to 3% of treated patients and are likely to occur in the setting of renal insufficiency and underlying disease of the central nervous system. Imipenem should be considered for treatment of mixed bacterial infections and treatment of resistant aerobic gram-negative bacteria that are not susceptible to other beta-lactam agents. In addition to provoking unnecessary toxicity, indiscriminate use of this agent will promote dissemination of resistance against it.

Effects of a restrictive antibiotic policy on clinical efficacy of antibiotics and susceptibility patterns of organisms

To assess the impact of a restrictive antimicrobial policy, the efficacy of therapeutic and prophylactic antibiotic regimens and the susceptibility patterns of infecting bacterial microorganisms were studied during a two-month period in 1986 in inpatients in a general hospital. Twenty-eight percent of patients received antimicrobial agents, 21% as treatment and 7% as prophylaxis. In the 359 evaluable episodes of infection cure was obtained in 88% of cases with the initial therapy and in 7% after a change of drugs, but treatment failed in 5%. Of the 18 cases of failure, improvement was seen in eight although the infection persisted. Ten patients died but in seven of them the infection only partially contributed to this outcome. Ten (8%) of 127 patients receiving antimicrobial prophylaxis developed an infection but in three there was no relation to the condition for which the prophylactic regimen was originally prescribed. No changes were found in the susceptibility patterns of microorganisms.

Imipenem/cilastatin. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic efficacy

Imipenem is the first available semisynthetic thienamycin and is administered intravenously in combination with cilastatin, a renal dipeptidase inhibitor that increases urinary excretion of active drug. In vitro studies have demonstrated that imipenem has an extremely wide spectrum of antibacterial activity against Gram-negative and Gram-positive aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, even against many multiresistant strains of bacteria. It is very potent against species which elaborate beta-lactamases. Imipenem in combination with equal doses of cilastatin has been shown to be generally well tolerated and an effective antimicrobial for the treatment of infections of various body systems. It is likely to be most valuable as empirical treatment of mixed aerobic and anaerobic infections, bacteraemia in non-neutropenic patients and serious hospital-acquired infections.

Imipenem/cilastatin as monotherapy in severe infections: comparison with cefotaxime in combination with metronidazole and cloxacillin. Report from a Norwegian Study Group

In a randomised and coordinated multicentre study, 143 patients with severe infections received treatment with either imipenem/cilastatin (72; I/C group) or cefotaxime combined with metronidazole and optional cloxacillin (71; CX/M/CL group). 67 patients in the I/C group and 65 in the CX/M/CL group were evaluable for clinical efficacy. 35 (I/C) and 44 (CX/M/CL) patients had bacteriologically documented infections. The clinical cure rate was 91% for I/C and 94% for CX/M/CL, and the bacteriological efficacy (eradicated strains) was 86% and 81%, respectively. Local reactions (phlebitis) were frequent in each group (I/C 18% and CX/M/CL 25%). Clinical side effects other than phlebitis (I/C 17% vs. CX/M/CL 13%) were mostly mild. Diarrhoea did not occur in I/C group. Laboratory untoward effects were mild and infrequent in each group. Reinfections of the urinary tract and superinfections at all sites prevailed in the CX/M/CL group (9 vs. 6 and 6 vs. 2, respectively). The superinfections were mostly mild. The efficacy and safety of I/C in severe infections were comparable to those of CX/M/CL.

Nosocomial and nursing home-acquired pneumonia. Recent therapeutic advances

In recent years, new broad-spectrum antibiotics have become available for the treatment of complex pneumonia. Used with care, these agents may allow effective monotherapy of difficult-to-treat pulmonary infections, with the added benefit of decreased toxicity in comparison with the more traditional multiple-drug combinations. The newer antibiotics are relatively expensive, but cost of their use can be justified by their reduced toxicity (in comparison with some antibiotic combinations) and by the avoidance of additional laboratory fees for routine drug monitoring. It is hoped that the major benefits that can accrue with proper use of the newer agents will not be outweighed by problems resulting from their indiscriminate use, such as increased bacterial resistance and exorbitant healthcare costs.