1998PubMedRequires access

A randomized controlled clinical trial on piperacillin/tazobactam versus ticarcillin/clavulanic acid for the treatment of bacterial infections.

Fajian Hou, Li J, Lizhen Gao, Y Chen

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two beta-lactam-beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, piperacillin/tazobactam and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of bacterial infections. METHODS: A randomized, open-labeled, controlled study was conducted for the treatment of 124 hospitalized patients with lower respiratory tract infection and urinary tract infections. Sixty-three patients received piperacillin (4 g)/tazobactam (500 mg) every 8 hours by intravenous infusion and 61 patients received ticarcillin (3 g)/clavulanic acid (200 mg) every 8 hours by intravenous infusion. The duration of treatment was 7-14 days in both groups. RESULTS: Sixty-three of 79 cases who received piperacillin/tazobactam and 61 of 84 cases who received ticarcillin/clavulanic acid were assessable for clinical efficacy. The overall efficacy rates were 90.5% for the piperacillin/tazobactam group and 88.5% for the ticarcillin/clavulanic acid group, whereas the bacterial eradication rates were 90.2% and 92.0%, respectively. 78 (77.2%) of 101 strains isolated from patients produced beta-lactamases. The adverse reaction was evaluated in 65 cases of piperacillin/tazobactam group and 62 cases of ticarcillin/clavulanic acid group. The adverse drug reaction rates were 7.69% (5/65) and 8.06% (5/62), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Piperacillin/tazobactam and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid were effective and safe for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections and urinary tract infections caused by beta-lactamase-producing strains. The results showed that there was no statistical difference between these two groups (P > 0.05).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two beta-lactam-beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, piperacillin/tazobactam and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of bacterial infections. METHODS: A randomized, open-labeled, controlled study was conducted for the treatment of 124 hospitalized patients with lower respiratory tract infection and urinary tract infections. Sixty-three patients received piperacillin (4 g)/tazobactam (500 mg) every 8 hours by intravenous infusion and 61 patients received ticarcillin (3 g)/clavulanic acid (200 mg) every 8 hours by intravenous infusion. The duration of treatment was 7-14 days in both groups. RESULTS: Sixty-three of 79 cases who received piperacillin/tazobactam and 61 of 84 cases who received ticarcillin/clavulanic acid were assessable for clinical efficacy. The overall efficacy rates were 90.5% for the piperacillin/tazobactam group and 88.5% for the ticarcillin/clavulanic acid group, whereas the bacterial eradication rates were 90.2% and 92.0%, respectively. 78 (77.2%) of 101 strains isolated from patients produced beta-lactamases. The adverse reaction was evaluated in 65 cases of piperacillin/tazobactam group and 62 cases of ticarcillin/clavulanic acid group. The adverse drug reaction rates were 7.69% (5/65) and 8.06% (5/62), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Piperacillin/tazobactam and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid were effective and safe for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections and urinary tract infections caused by beta-lactamase-producing strains. The results showed that there was no statistical difference between these two groups (P > 0.05).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 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

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two beta-lactam-beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, piperacillin/tazobactam and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of bacterial infections. METHODS: A randomized, open-labeled, controlled study was conducted for the treatment of 124 hospitalized patients with lower respiratory tract infection and urinary tract infections. Sixty-three patients received piperacillin (4 g)/tazobactam (500 mg) every 8 hours by intravenous infusion and 61 patients received ticarcillin (3 g)/clavulanic acid (200 mg) every 8 hours by intravenous infusion. The duration of treatment was 7-14 days in both groups. RESULTS: Sixty-three of 79 cases who received piperacillin/tazobactam and 61 of 84 cases who received ticarcillin/clavulanic acid were assessable for clinical efficacy. The overall efficacy rates were 90.5% for the piperacillin/tazobactam group and 88.5% for the ticarcillin/clavulanic acid group, whereas the bacterial eradication rates were 90.2% and 92.0%, respectively. 78 (77.2%) of 101 strains isolated from patients produced beta-lactamases. The adverse reaction was evaluated in 65 cases of piperacillin/tazobactam group and 62 cases of ticarcillin/clavulanic acid group. The adverse drug reaction rates were 7.69% (5/65) and 8.06% (5/62), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Piperacillin/tazobactam and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid were effective and safe for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections and urinary tract infections caused by beta-lactamase-producing strains. The results showed that there was no statistical difference between these two groups (P > 0.05).

Key concepts: Ticarcillin, Piperacillin/tazobactam, Piperacillin, Clavulanic acid, Tazobactam, Medicine, Internal medicine, Gastroenterology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A randomized controlled clinical trial on piperacillin/tazobactam versus ticarcillin/clavulanic acid for the treatment of bacterial infections. — Research Paper | ScholarLens