These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Topical mupirocin vs. systemic erythromycin treatment for pyoderma.
    Author: McLinn S.
    Journal: Pediatr Infect Dis J; 1988 Nov; 7(11):785-90. PubMed ID: 3148127.
    Abstract:
    Although topical antibiotics have been considered less than effective agents in the treatment of "impetigo," recent experience suggests that topical therapy has a place as primary treatment of pyoderma and impetigo. This bacteriologically controlled, randomized study compared the safety and efficacy of mupirocin with oral erythromycin in the treatment of pyoderma and impetigo. A total of 29 mupirocin-treated and 30 erythromycin-treated patients completed the study. None of the mupirocin-treated patients reported adverse experiences compared with 4 erythromycin-treated patients who reported 6 adverse experiences. The mupirocin-treated group had a significantly higher benefit:risk ratio than the erythromycin-treated group as measured by the investigator's global evaluation (P = 0.01). Both treatments eradicated 100% of the two most common pathogens, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes. Results from this study demonstrate that mupirocin is as effective as systemic erythromycin ethylsuccinate for treatment of pyoderma and impetigo.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]