4.7 Article

A prospective, randomized trial of 3 or 14 days of ciprofloxacin treatment for acute urinary tract infection in patients with spinal cord injury

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 39, Issue 5, Pages 658-664

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1086/423000

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Urinary tract infection ( UTI) is common among patients with spinal cord injury. The optimal duration of treatment for symptomatic UTI has not been determined. Methods. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial compared 3-day and 14-day regimens of ciprofloxacin, 250 mg twice daily, for the treatment of acute UTI in patients with spinal cord injury. Patients with pyelonephritis, struvite stones, hydronephrosis, or long-term indwelling catheters were excluded from the trial. Results. Sixty patients with spinal cord injury were enrolled in the trial, with 30 patients assigned to each study arm. The most common infecting organisms were Klebsiella species (30%), Enterococcus species (22%), and Escherichia coli (22%); 33% of the infections were polymicrobial. Microbiological cure at long-term follow-up was significantly better among patients who received therapy for 14 days than among patients who received therapy for 3 days. By 6 weeks of follow-up, microbiological relapse (in 11 [37%] of 30 patients vs. 2 [7%] of 30 patients; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-3.18; P=.01) and symptomatic relapse (in 7 [23%] 30 patients vs. 0 of 30 patients; 95% CI, 1.69-3.13; P=.01) both occurred more frequently in patients treated for 3 days. Reinfection occurred with similar frequency in patients in the 2 study arms. Six of 7 evaluable patients with treatment failure had a fluoroquinolone-resistant organism isolated at enrollment. Conclusions. For patients with spinal cord injury, treatment of acute symptomatic UTI for 14 days leads to improved clinical and microbiological outcomes, compared with short-course therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available