Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1983 Jan;11(1):75-82.
doi: 10.1093/jac/11.1.75.

Cefoperazone versus cefamandole in the treatment of acute bacterial lower respiratory tract infections

Clinical Trial

Cefoperazone versus cefamandole in the treatment of acute bacterial lower respiratory tract infections

T M File Jr et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1983 Jan.

Abstract

In a randomized comparative study, 113 patients were treated with cefoperazone or cefamandole for acute bacterial lower respiratory tract infections. Most patients had Streptococcus pneumoniae or Haemophilus influenzae infections, although five patients in the cefoperazone group had infections caused by other Gram-negative bacilli (two with Pseudomonas aeruginosa). The clinical responses and adverse effects were not significantly different between the two treatment groups. Satisfactory clinical responses occurred in 36/39 (92%) of evaluable patients in the cefoperazone group and 33/34 (97%) of evaluable patients treated with cefamandole. Two failures in the cefoperazone group were secondary to superinfection (Acinetobacter and Ps. aeruginosa). Bacteriological and symptomatic failure occurred in one patient with Ps. aeruginosa lung abscess treated with cefoperazone and in one patient with a polymicrobial empyema treated with cefamandole. The results of this study indicate that cefoperazone is safe and effective in the therapy of acute bacterial lower respiratory tract infections.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources