Oral sitafloxacin vs intravenous ceftriaxone followed by oral cefdinir for acute pyelonephritis and complicated urinary tract infection: a randomized controlled trial

被引:10
作者
Lojanapiwat, Bannakij [1 ]
Nimitvilai, Sireethorn [2 ]
Bamroongya, Manit [3 ]
Jirajariyavej, SupunNee [4 ]
Tiradechavat, Chirawat [5 ]
Malithong, Aumnat [6 ]
Predanon, Chagkrapan [7 ]
Tanphaichitra, Dan [8 ]
Lertsupphakul, Boonlert [9 ]
机构
[1] Chiang Mai Univ, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hosp, Fac Med, Dept Surg, Chiang Mai, Thailand
[2] Nakhon Pathom Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Tambon Phra Prathom Ch, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
[3] Buddasothorn Hosp, Dept Surg, Chachoengsao, Thailand
[4] Taksin Hosp, Dept Med, Bangkok, Thailand
[5] Udon Thani Hosp, Dept Surg, Udon Thani, Thailand
[6] BMA Gen Hosp, Dept Med, Bangkok, Thailand
[7] Khon Kaen Hosp, Dept Surg, Khon Kaen, Thailand
[8] Anandamahidol Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Lopburi, Thailand
[9] Maharaj Nakorn Si Thammarat Hosp, Dept Surg, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand
关键词
acute pyelonephritis; complicated urinary tract infection; sitafloxacin; ceftriaxone; cefdinir; LEVOFLOXACIN;
D O I
10.2147/IDR.S178183
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Background: The conventional antibiotic regimen for community-acquired upper urinary tract infections with moderate severity in Thailand is parenteral ceftriaxone (CTRX) for several days followed by oral cephalosporin for 7-14 days. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of oral sitafloxacin (STFX) with that of intravenous CTRX followed by oral cefdinir (CFDN) for the therapy of acute pyelonephritis (APN) and complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI). Methods: This open-label, randomized, controlled, noninferiority clinical trial included patients from nine centers across Thailand. Adult patients with APN or cUTI were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of oral STFX twice daily for 7-14 days, or 2g of intravenous CTRX for several days followed by 100 mg of oral CFDN three times per day for another 4-12 days. Results: A total of 289 adult patients with APN or cUTI (141 in the STFX group and 148 in the CTRX/CFDN group) were included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis, and 211 patients (108 in the STFX group and 103 in the CTRX/CFDN group) were included in the per-protocol (PP) analysis. The baseline characteristics of patients in both groups were comparable. The causative pathogen in most patients with APN or cUTI was Escherichia coli. The clinical success rates at the end of treatment revealed the STFX regimen to be noninferior to the CTRX/CFDN regimen (86.6% vs 83.8% for ITT analysis and 97.2% vs 99.0% for PP analysis, respectively). Adverse events with mild-to-moderate severity were similar between groups. Conclusion: Oral STFX is noninferior to intravenous CTRX followed by oral CFDN in adult patients with APN and cUTI. Lower rates of resistance compared to CTRX and/or CFDN and oral administration suggest STFX as a more attractive treatment option in this patient population.
引用
收藏
页码:173 / 180
页数:8
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
Akasaka S., 2008, JPN J CHEMOTHER, V56, P92
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2008, JPN J CHEMOTHER
[3]   Oral Treatment Options for Ambulatory Patients with Urinary Tract Infections Caused by Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli [J].
Auer, Simon ;
Wojna, Alexandra ;
Hell, Markus .
ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY, 2010, 54 (09) :4006-4008
[4]   Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections [J].
Chenoweth, Carol E. ;
Gould, Carolyn V. ;
Saint, Sanjay .
INFECTIOUS DISEASE CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2014, 28 (01) :105-+
[5]   A randomized controlled trial (volunteer study) of sitafloxacin, enoxacin, levofloxacin and sparfloxacin phototoxicity [J].
Dawe, RS ;
Ibbotson, SH ;
Sanderson, JB ;
Thomson, EM ;
Ferguson, J .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2003, 149 (06) :1232-1241
[6]   Urinary tract infections: epidemiology, mechanisms of infection and treatment options [J].
Flores-Mireles, Ana L. ;
Walker, Jennifer N. ;
Caparon, Michael ;
Hultgren, Scott J. .
NATURE REVIEWS MICROBIOLOGY, 2015, 13 (05) :269-284
[7]  
Gupta K, 2011, CLIN INFECT DIS, V52, pE103, DOI [10.1093/cid/cir102, 10.1093/cid/ciq257]
[8]   Sitafloxacin hydrate for bacterial infections [J].
Leif Anderson, David .
DRUGS OF TODAY, 2008, 44 (07) :489-501
[9]   A randomized controlled trial of sitafloxacin vs. ertapenem as a switch therapy after treatment for acute pyelonephritis caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli: A pilot study [J].
Malaisri, Chitprasong ;
Phuphuakrat, Angsana ;
Wibulpolprasert, Arrug ;
Santanirand, Pitak ;
Kiertiburanakul, Sasisopin .
JOURNAL OF INFECTION AND CHEMOTHERAPY, 2017, 23 (08) :556-562
[10]   Treatment outcomes of oral sitafloxacin in acute complicated urinary tract infection and pyelonephritis [J].
Manosuthi, Weerawat ;
Wiboonchutikul, Surasak .
SPRINGERPLUS, 2016, 5