1997•Scandinavian Journal of Infectious DiseasesRequires access

Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 g daily) versus Meropenem (3.0 g daily) in Patients with Intra-abdominal Infections: Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre Trial

Antonio Basoli, Emanuele Zarba Meli, Paolo Mazzocchi, Vincenzo Speranza, Study Group

Open publisher page 40 citations

Abstract

An open-label prospective, randomized, parallel multicentre study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 1.5 g/day intravenous imipenem/cilastatin with 3 g/day intravenous meropenem in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. A total of 287 patients were enrolled: 201 patients, divided between the 2 treatment groups, were evaluable. Clinical outcome, bacteriological outcome, untoward microbiological effects, and clinical and laboratory adverse experiences were evaluated. 98% of patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin therapy were cured, with 96% showing eradication of infection. 95% of those on meropenem were cured, with 98% showing eradication. These differences in clinical and bacteriological outcome between the 2 treatments were not statistically significant. Two patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin and 5 receiving meropenem had untoward microbiological effects. There was a 0.7% frequency (1/139 patients) of possibly or probably drug-related clinical or laboratory adverse experiences with imipenem/cilastatin and a 2.7% frequency (4/148) with meropenem. The mean time to defervescence was significantly less for patients in the imipenem/cilastatin treatment group than for those receiving meropenem. This study shows that 1.5 g/day of imipenem/cilastatin is equivalent to 3.0 g/day meropenem in clinical and bacteriological outcome, as well as in incidence of side effects.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

An open-label prospective, randomized, parallel multicentre study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 1.5 g/day intravenous imipenem/cilastatin with 3 g/day intravenous meropenem in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. A total of 287 patients were enrolled: 201 patients, divided between the 2 treatment groups, were evaluable. Clinical outcome, bacteriological outcome, untoward microbiological effects, and clinical and laboratory adverse experiences were evaluated. 98% of patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin therapy were cured, with 96% showing eradication of infection. 95% of those on meropenem were cured, with 98% showing eradication. These differences in clinical and bacteriological outcome between the 2 treatments were not statistically significant. Two patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin and 5 receiving meropenem had untoward microbiological effects. There was a 0.7% frequency (1/139 patients) of possibly or probably drug-related clinical or laboratory adverse experiences with imipenem/cilastatin and a 2.7% frequency (4/148) with meropenem. The mean time to defervescence was significantly less for patients in the imipenem/cilastatin treatment group than for those receiving meropenem. This study shows that 1.5 g/day of imipenem/cilastatin is equivalent to 3.0 g/day meropenem in clinical and bacteriological outcome, as well as in incidence of side effects.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 40 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

An open-label prospective, randomized, parallel multicentre study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 1.5 g/day intravenous imipenem/cilastatin with 3 g/day intravenous meropenem in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. A total of 287 patients were enrolled: 201 patients, divided between the 2 treatment groups, were evaluable. Clinical outcome, bacteriological outcome, untoward microbiological effects, and clinical and laboratory adverse experiences were evaluated. 98% of patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin therapy were cured, with 96% showing eradication of infection. 95% of those on meropenem were cured, with 98% showing eradication. These differences in clinical and bacteriological outcome between the 2 treatments were not statistically significant. Two patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin and 5 receiving meropenem had untoward microbiological effects. There was a 0.7% frequency (1/139 patients) of possibly or probably drug-related clinical or laboratory adverse experiences with imipenem/cilastatin and a 2.7% frequency (4/148) with meropenem. The mean time to defervescence was significantly less for patients in the imipenem/cilastatin treatment group than for those receiving meropenem. This study shows that 1.5 g/day of imipenem/cilastatin is equivalent to 3.0 g/day meropenem in clinical and bacteriological outcome, as well as in incidence of side effects.

Key concepts: Imipenem/cilastatin, Meropenem, Imipenem, Medicine, Cilastatin, Randomized controlled trial, Internal medicine, Prospective cohort study

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 g daily) versus Meropenem (3.0 g daily) in Patients with Intra-abdominal Infections: Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre Trial — Research Paper | ScholarLens