CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Ampicillin + sulbactam vs clindamycin +/- cephalosporin for the treatment of aspiration pneumonia and primary lung abscess.

Aspiration pneumonia, necrotising pneumonia and primary lung abscess are complications arising from the aspiration of infectious material from the oral cavity or stomach. There is limited information on optimal antibacterial therapeutic regimens. Patients with pulmonary infection following aspiration (n = 95) were included in a prospective, open, randomised, comparative multicentre trial to compare the safety, clinical and bacteriological efficacy of ampicillin + sulbactam vs. clindamycin +/- cephalosporin. Treated patients (n = 70) received sequential antibiotic therapy with either ampicillin + sulbactam (n = 37) or clindamycin (n = 33), with or without a second- or third-generation cephalosporin, administered until the complete resolution of clinical and radiological abnormalities. Definite or presumptive pathogens were isolated from 58 patients. Mean duration of therapy was 22.7 days for ampicillin + sulbactam and 24.1 days for clindamycin. In patients treated with ampicillin + sulbactam, the clinical response was 73.0% at the end of therapy and 67.5% 7-14 days after therapy. For clindamycin, the rates were 66.7% and 63.5%, respectively. Bacteriological response was similar in both treatment arms. Nine patients died (12.9%), with a Simplified Acute Physiology Score of > 30 points being the only significant predictive factor for therapeutic failure. Ampicillin + sulbactam and clindamycin +/- cephalosporin were both well-tolerated and proved equally effective in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia and lung abscess.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app