4.5 Article

Full-course oral levofloxacin for treatment of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10096-003-1060-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most guidelines for the management of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) recommend commencing therapy with intravenous antibiotics, primarily because of concern about absorption of oral antibiotics in acutely ill patients. However, patients who respond are rapidly switched to oral therapy, which has been shown to reduce costs and to shorten the length of stay. The aim of the present study was to determine whether a full course of oral antibiotics is as efficacious and as safe as intravenous-to-oral sequential antibiotic therapy for the treatment of hospitalized, non-ICU patients with CAP. In an open-labelled, controlled study, 129 hospitalized patients with CAP were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either a full course of oral levofloxacin (500 mg q12 h) or an intravenous-to-oral sequential therapy consisting of intravenous ceftriaxone (2 g q24 h) with or without clarithromycin (500 mg q12 h) followed by an oral antibiotic (a beta-lactam agent in the majority of patients). The primary study endpoint was the resolution of CAP; secondary endpoints included length of stay and overall mortality. CAP resolved in 72 of 79 (91.1%) patients in the levofloxacin group and in 34 of 37 (91.9%) patients in the intravenous-to-oral sequential therapy group (difference, -0.8%, 95%CI, -11.6-10.0). Median length of stay was 8 days (range, 2-74 days) in the levofloxacin group and 10 days (range, 3-29 days) in the intravenous-to-oral sequential therapy group (P=0.28). Day 30 mortality rates were 1.3% (1 of 79) and 8.1% (3 of 37), respectively (difference, -6.8%, 95%CI, -16.0-2.3). Full-course oral levofloxacin is as efficacious and as safe as standard intravenous-to-oral sequential antibiotic therapy for the treatment of hospitalized patients with CAP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据