Open AccessDouble‐blind, multicenter, prospective randomized study of trospectomycin vs. clindamycin, both with aztreonam, in non‐community acquired obstetric and gynecologic infections
Author(s) -
Chatwani Ashwin,
Martens Mark,
Blanco Jorge,
Gall Stanley,
Przybylko Kira,
Wajszczuk Charles P.,
Nickens Dana
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.656
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 1098-0997
pISSN - 1064-7449
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1098-0997(1997)5:4<280::aid-idog4>3.0.co;2-0
Subject(s) - medicine , clindamycin , aztreonam , adverse effect , cellulitis , randomized controlled trial , surgery , antibiotics , antibiotic resistance , imipenem , microbiology and biotechnology , biology
Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of trospectomycin sulfate with that of clindamycin phosphate, both with aztreonam, for the treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. Methods In a double‐blind, multicenter, prospective randomized study, 579 patients with either endometritis following cesarean delivery or pelvic cellulitis following hysterectomy were enrolled and received medication. Administered was either trospectomycin sulfate 500 mg IV every 8 h or clindamycin phosphate 900 mg IV every 8 h in a 1:1 randomization ratio. Both groups of patients received aztreonam 1 g IV every 8 h. The patients were followed for clinical responses and side effects. Results The cure rate for the trospectomycin sulfate arm was 91.8% and for clindamycin phosphate arm it was 88.4% ( P = 0.218). The adverse events were similar in both groups. Conclusions Trospectomycin was as effective as clindamycin, when both were combined with aztreonam, in treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. Infect. Dis. Obstet. Gynecol. 5:280–285, 1997. © 1998 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.