Related Experiment Videos
Loracarbef vs. cefaclor in pediatric skin and skin structure infections
M J Hanfling1, S A Hausinger, J Squires
1Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030.
Insights
Loracarbef and cefaclor show similar safety and effectiveness in treating pediatric skin infections. Both antibiotics demonstrated high clinical response and pathogen eradication rates with few adverse effects in children.
Area of Science:
- Infectious Diseases
- Pediatric Medicine
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Skin and skin structure infections are common in children.
- Antibiotic resistance necessitates the evaluation of new antimicrobial agents.
- Loracarbef, a carbacephem, and cefaclor, a cephalosporin, are used for bacterial infections.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the safety and efficacy of loracarbef versus cefaclor in treating pediatric skin and skin structure infections.
- To evaluate clinical response and pathogen eradication rates.
- To assess the incidence of adverse reactions in children.
Main Methods:
- A double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted.
- 214 children (6 months to 12 years) received either loracarbef or cefaclor oral suspensions for 7 days.
- Efficacy was assessed by clinical response and pathogen eradication at 72 hours and 10-14 days post-treatment.
Main Results:
- High favorable clinical response and pathogen eradication rates were observed for both loracarbef (97.3% and 95.6%) and cefaclor (92.3% and 86.2%).
- Adverse reaction incidence, including gastrointestinal effects, was low in both treatment groups.
- No statistically significant differences in clinical efficacy, bacteriologic efficacy, or safety were detected between loracarbef and cefaclor.
Conclusions:
- Loracarbef is a safe and effective alternative to cefaclor for treating skin and skin structure infections in children.
- Both antibiotics demonstrate comparable efficacy and safety profiles.
- Further research may explore broader applications and long-term outcomes.
Abstract:
A double blind, randomized clinical trial involving 214 children, ages 6 months to 12 years, compared the safety and effectiveness of the new carbacephem loracarbef and the cephalosporin cefaclor for the treatment of skin and skin structure infections. The two agents were given primarily as oral suspensions. Dosages were 15 mg/kg/day in two divided doses for loracarbef and 20 mg/kg/day in three divided doses for cefaclor. Assessment 72 hours after completion of the 7-day course of treatment indicated a favorable clinical response plus eradication of the pretherapy pathogen in 97.3% of the 74 loracarbef-treated patients eligible for evaluation and 92.3% of 78 evaluable cefaclor-treated patients. Favorable response rates at a second posttreatment visit 10 to 14 days after the end of therapy were 95.6% in 68 evaluable loracarbef-treated patients and 86.2% in 65 treated with cefaclor. The incidence of adverse reactions, including gastrointestinal effects, was low in both groups. No statistical difference in clinical or bacteriologic efficacy or safety was detected between patients treated with loracarbef and cefaclor.