Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in intra-abdominal infections requiring surgery

In a multicentre, open, randomised study, the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous meropenem (1 g every 8 h, infusion or bolus) was compared with that of intravenous imipenem/cilastatin (1 g every 8 h, infusion) in 232 hospitalised patients with moderate to severe intra-abdominal infections. At the end of therapy, a satisfactory clinical response (cure or improvement) was seen in 79/82 (96%) evaluable meropenem patients and 83/88 (94%) imipenem/cilastatin patients; this was still seen at follow-up (57/63; 90% and 58/66; 88%, respectively). A satisfactory bacteriological response (elimination or presumed elimination) was seen in 69/82 (84%) meropenem patients and 71/88 (81%) imipenem/cilastatin patients at the end of therapy and in 52/62 (84%) and 55/70 (79%), respectively, at follow-up. There was a high level of clinical cure or improvement (95% for both treatment groups) in the 120 patients (60 in each group) who had polymicrobial infections. A similar incidence of adverse events was seen in each group: 45/116 patients in the meropenem group (72 events) and 42/116 patients in the imipenem/cilastatin group (65 events); the adverse event profiles were also similar, with injection site inflammation and elevated transaminases the most frequent in both groups. The results of this study indicate that monotherapy with meropenem was as effective and as well tolerated as the combination of imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of moderate to severe intra-abdominal infections.