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: [Parasitological and clinical response to amodiaquine versus chloroquine in the treatment of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in children in an endemic area].
    Author: Penali LK, Assi-Coulibaly L, Kaptué B, Konan D, Ehouman A.
    Journal: Bull Soc Pathol Exot; 1994; 87(4):244-7. PubMed ID: 7866044.
    Abstract:
    The therapeutic management of malaria in endemic regions is now hampered not only by the limited number of antimalarial agents, but also by the appearance of chemoresistant plasmodial strains and by the sometimes severe adverse effects related to the use of some of these drugs. Between January and July 1993, 100 patients presenting with symptomatic Plasmodium falciparum malaria were randomised to receive amodiaquine or chloroquine at the dose of 30 mg/kg for 3 days. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of these two 4-aminoquinolines in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria. The parasite clearance was 4.87 (+/- 0.33) days in the amodiaquine group and 5.55 (+/- 0.31) days in the chloroquine group. All subjects in both groups were afebrile by D7. Cutaneous adverse effects, such as pruritus, were reported with both amodiaquine (3.2%) and chloroquine (6.8%). Amodiaquine was found to be significantly more effective than chloroquine in terms of parasite clearance on D7. The therapeutic failure rate was 0% for amodiaquine versus 16.3% for chloroquine. At a time when chemoresistance of Plasmodium falciparum, especially chloroquine-resistance, has spread to malarial endemic zones, amodiaquine should be very widely indicated in the treatment of simple malaria due to its excellent efficacy and good safety.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]