4.6 Article

Efficacy and safety of IV/PO moxifloxacin and IV piperacillin/tazobactam followed by PO amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of diabetic foot infections: results of the RELIEF study

期刊

INFECTION
卷 41, 期 1, 页码 175-186

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s15010-012-0367-x

关键词

Antibiotic therapy; Diabetic foot infection; Fluoroquinolone; Moxifloxacin; Controlled clinical trial; Sequential therapy; Diabetic foot ulcer

资金

  1. Bayer Healthcare
  2. GlaxoSmithKline
  3. NovoNordisk
  4. Sanofi Aventis
  5. Pfizer
  6. LifeScan
  7. Ferring
  8. DSM Pharmaceuticals
  9. Bayer
  10. Janssen Cilag
  11. Novartis
  12. MSD
  13. ECDC
  14. Reed Business
  15. AstraZeneca
  16. Astellas
  17. Johnson Johnson

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of two antibiotic regimens in patients with diabetic foot infections (DFIs). Methods Data of a subset of patients enrolled in the RELIEF trial with DFIs requiring surgery and antibiotics were evaluated retrospectively. DFI was diagnosed on the basis of the modified Wagner, University of Texas, and PEDIS classification systems. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous/oral moxifloxacin (MXF, N = 110) 400 mg q.d. or intravenous piperacillin/tazobactam 4.0/0.5 g t.d.s. followed by oral amoxicillin/clavulanate 875/125 mg b.d. (PIP/TAZ-AMC, N = 96), for 7-21 days until the end of treatment (EOT). The primary endpoint was clinical cure rates in the per-protocol (PP) population at the test-of-cure visit (TOC, 14-28 days after EOT). Results There were no significant differences between the demographic characteristics of PP patients in either treatment group. At TOC, MXF and PIP/TAZ-AMC had similar efficacy in both the PP and intent-to-treat (ITT) populations: MXF: 76.4 % versus PIP/TAZ-AMC: 78.1 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI) -14.5 %, 9.0 % in the PP population; MXF: 69.9 % versus PIP/TAZ-AMC: 69.1 %; 95 % CI -12.4 %, 12.1 % in the ITT population. The overall bacteriological success rates were similar in both treatment groups (MXF: 71.7 % versus PIP/TAZ-AMC: 71.8 %; 95 % CI -16.9 %, 10.7 %). A similar proportion of patients (ITT population) experienced any adverse events in both treatment groups (MXF: 30.9 % versus PIP/TAZ-AMC: 31.8 %, respectively). Death occurred in three MXF-treated patients and one PIP/TAZ-AMC-treated patient; these were unrelated to the study drugs. Conclusion Moxifloxacin has shown favorable safety and efficacy profiles in DFI patients and could be an alternative antibiotic therapy in the management of DFI. Clinical trial: NCT00402727.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据