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
. 1996 Mar;223(3):303-15.
doi: 10.1097/00000658-199603000-00012.

Results of a randomized trial comparing sequential intravenous/oral treatment with ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole to imipenem/cilastatin for intra-abdominal infections. The Intra-Abdominal Infection Study Group

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Results of a randomized trial comparing sequential intravenous/oral treatment with ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole to imipenem/cilastatin for intra-abdominal infections. The Intra-Abdominal Infection Study Group

J S Solomkin et al. Ann Surg. 1996 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial, ciprofloxacin/metronidazole was compared with imipenem/cilastatin for treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections. A secondary objective was to demonstrate the ability to switch responding patients from intravenous (IV) to oral (PO) therapy.

Summary background data: Intra-abdominal infections result in substantial morbidity, mortality, and cost. Antimicrobial therapy often includes a 7- to 10-day intravenous course. The use of oral antimicrobials is a recent advance due to the availability of agents with good tissue pharmacokinetics and potent aerobic gram-negative activity.

Methods: Patients were randomized to either ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole intravenously (CIP/MTZ IV) or imipenem intravenously (IMI IV) throughout their treatment course, or ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole intravenously and treatment with oral ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole when oral feeding was resumed (CIP/MTZ IV/PO).

Results: Among 671 patients who constituted the intent-to-treat population, overall success rates were as follows: 82% for the group treated with CIP/MTZ IV; 84% for the CIP/MTZ IV/PO group; and 82% for the IMI IV group. For 330 valid patients, treatment success occurred in 84% of patients treated with CIP/MTZ IV, 86% of those treated with CIP/MTZ IV/PO, and 81% of the patients treated with IMI IV. Analysis of microbiology in the 30 patients undergoing intervention after treatment failure suggested that persistence of gram-negative organisms was more common in the IMI IV-treated patients who subsequently failed. Of 46 CIP/MTZ IV/PO patients (active oral arm), treatment success occurred in 96%, compared with 89% for those treated with CIP/MTZ IV and 89% for those receiving IMI IV. Patients who received intravenous/oral therapy were treated, overall, for an average of 8.6 +/- 3.6 days, with an average of 4.0 +/- 3.0 days of oral treatment.

Conclusions: These results demonstrate statistical equivalence between CIP/MTZ IV and IMI IV in both the intent-to-treat and valid populations. Conversion to oral therapy with CIP/MTZ appears as effective as continued intravenous therapy in patients able to tolerate oral feedings.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Clin Infect Dis. 1992 Nov;15 Suppl 1:S5-32 - PubMed
    1. Clin Infect Dis. 1992 Nov;15 Suppl 1:S33-42 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg. 1993 Feb;217(2):115-21 - PubMed
    1. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Apr;31(4):505-22 - PubMed
    1. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 May;37(5):997-1000 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources