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: Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of hospitalized patients with skin and soft tissue infections.
    Author: Nichols RL, Smith JW, Geckler RW, Wilson SE.
    Journal: South Med J; 1995 Apr; 88(4):397-404. PubMed ID: 7716590.
    Abstract:
    Meropenem is a new carbapenem antibiotic shown to resist degradation by renal dehydropeptidase I. In a multicenter, open-label, prospective trial, we compared the efficacy and safety of meropenem with imipenem/cilastatin in patients with skin and soft tissue infections. Patients received either 500 mg of meropenem every 8 hours (n = 184) or 500 mg of imipenem/cilastatin every 6 hours (n = 193), by intravenous infusion for an average of 6 to 7 days. Satisfactory clinical responses were achieved in 120 (98%) of 123 assessable meropenem-treated patients and in 120 (95%) of 126 assessable imipenem/cilastatin-treated patients. Satisfactory bacteriologic responses were achieved in 120 (98%) of 123 assessable meropenem-treated patients and in 120 (95%) of 126 assessable imipenem/cilastatin-treated patients. Satisfactory bacteriologic response rates were high as well: 94% with meropenem and 91% with imipenem/cilastatin. Between-group differences in satisfactory response rates were not significant (95% confidence interval, -2.29 to 6.93 [clinical]; -2.73 to 10.39 [bacteriologic]). Overall pathogen eradication rates (for aerobes and anaerobes) were slightly higher for meropenem. Elevated liver enzymes were the most frequent adverse events in each treatment group. Meropenem was well tolerated and as effective as imipenem/cilastatin in treatment of hospitalized patients with skin and soft tissue infections.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]