Related Experiment Videos
[A comparative study of cefepime for chronic respiratory tract infections]
1First Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of the Ryukyus and Related Hospital.
Abstract:
The clinical efficacy, safety and usefulness of Cefepime (CFPM), a new cephem antibiotics, in chronic respiratory infections were evaluated in a comparative study against Ceftazidime (CAZ). Each drug was administered by intravenous drip infusion at a dose of 1.0 g (nominal potency), twice daily for 14 days, and the following results were obtained: 1. A total of 170 cases were enrolled in this study. Efficacy rates ("good" or better responses) as evaluated by the subcommittee were 86.2% (56/65) in the CFPM group and 84.5% (60/71) in the CAZ group, with no significant difference between the two groups. 2. Efficacy rates ("good" or better responses) as evaluated by attending physicians were 83.3% (55/66) in the CFPM group and 84.5% (60/71) in the CAZ group with no significant difference between the two groups. 3. Bacteriologically, eradication rates were 83.3% (40/48) in the CFPM group and 88.2% (45/51) in the CAZ group, with no significant difference between the two groups. 4. Side effects occurred in none of the patients in the CAZ group and in 4 of the 66 patients in the CFPM group. There was a significant difference between the two groups (Fisher's test p = 0.0489). The incidence of abnormal laboratory findings were 17.6% (12/68) in the CFPM group and 21.1% (16/76) in the CAZ group. There was no significant difference between the two groups. 5. The utility rates evaluated by the subcommittee were 81.8% (54/66) in the CFPM group and 84.5% (60/71) in the CAZ group with no significant difference between the two groups. Only in the incidence of side effects, there was a significant difference between the two groups (Fisher's test p = 0.0489), but there was no significant difference in other items of efficacy, safety and usefulness between the two groups. These results indicate that CFPM is useful for the treatment of chronic respiratory tract infections.
Insights
Cefepime (CFPM) and Ceftazidime (CAZ) showed similar efficacy in treating chronic respiratory infections. CFPM had a higher incidence of side effects, but both antibiotics proved useful.
Area of Science:
- Infectious Diseases
- Pharmacology
- Respiratory Medicine
Background:
- Chronic respiratory infections pose significant treatment challenges.
- Newer antibiotics are continuously evaluated for improved clinical outcomes.
- Cephem antibiotics are a crucial class for managing bacterial respiratory infections.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the clinical efficacy, safety, and usefulness of Cefepime (CFPM) against Ceftazidime (CAZ).
- To evaluate the effectiveness of CFPM in treating chronic respiratory tract infections.
Main Methods:
- A comparative study involving 170 patients with chronic respiratory infections.
- Intravenous drip infusion of 1.0 g of either CFPM or CAZ, twice daily for 14 days.
- Evaluation of efficacy, bacteriological eradication, safety (side effects, lab findings), and utility rates.
Main Results:
- Overall efficacy rates were comparable between CFPM (86.2%) and CAZ (84.5%).
- Bacteriological eradication rates were also similar (CFPM: 83.3%, CAZ: 88.2%).
- CFPM showed a significantly higher incidence of side effects (p=0.0489) compared to CAZ, which had none.
Conclusions:
- Cefepime (CFPM) demonstrates comparable clinical efficacy and usefulness to Ceftazidime (CAZ) in chronic respiratory infections.
- While effective, CFPM is associated with a higher rate of side effects than CAZ.
- Both antibiotics are considered useful for treating chronic respiratory tract infections, with safety profiles being a key differentiator.