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: [Imipenem/cilastatin sodium alone or combined with amikacin sulfate in respiratory infections].
    Author: Takamoto M, Ishibashi T, Toyoshima H, Tanaka H, Tamaru N, Watanabe K, Yoshida M, Tokunaga N, Ichikawa Y, Oizumi K.
    Journal: Jpn J Antibiot; 1994 Sep; 47(9):1131-44. PubMed ID: 7990255.
    Abstract:
    In the present study, we used the envelope method to divide patients with respiratory infections into two groups: a monotherapy group given imipenem/cilastatin sodium (IPM/CS) and a combination therapy group given imipenem/cilastatin sodium plus amikacin sulfate (AMK). We then compared the clinical efficacy and safety between groups. 1. Safety was evaluated in 83 patients in the IPM/CS group and 88 in the IPM/CS + AMK group while clinical efficacy was evaluated in 77 and 80 patients in the respective groups. 2. The overall efficacy rate was 84.4% in the IPM/CS group. Among the main infections, the efficacy rates were 82.7% in 52 cases of pneumonia (including lung abscess), 100% in cases of infected bronchiectasis, 66.7% in six cases of secondary infection of chronic respiratory disease, and 100% in four cases of chronic bronchitis. The overall efficacy rate was 83.8% in the IPM/CS + AMK group. Among the main infections, the efficacy rates were 88.1% in 59 cases of pneumonia (including lung abscess), 83.3% in 12 cases of infected bronchiectasis, and 60.0% in five cases of secondary infection of chronic respiratory disease. No significant differences in efficacies were seen between groups. 3. In the IPM/CS group, the efficacy rates were 92.3% for patients without prior antibiotic therapy in the IPM/CS group and 68.0% for those with prior therapy; in the IPM/CS + AMK group, the respective rates were 83.7% and 83.9%. In the IPM/CS group, there was a significant difference in the responses of patients with and without prior antibiotic therapy (P < 0.05). 4. Side effects were observed in six patients in the IPM/CS group (7.2%) and two patients in the IPM/CS + AMK group (2.3%). Abnormal laboratory test results were noted in 5 patients in the IPM/CS group (6.0%) and in 10 in the IPM/CS + f1p4group (11.4%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects between groups and no severe adverse reactions in either group. These results indicate that IPM/CS alone produces of good response in moderate to severe respiratory infections while IPM/CS combined with AMK is useful in intractable respiratory infections.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]