Cefoperazone-sulbactam for treatment of intra-abdominal infections: results from a randomized, parallel group study in India

Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2008 Jun;9(3):367-76. doi: 10.1089/sur.2007.013.

Abstract

Background: Combinations of a third-generation cephalosporin and metronidazole, with or without an aminoglycoside, often are used for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections in surgical settings. Simpler regimens that preserve an adequate spectrum of coverage, but allow easier administration and have fewer side effects, may be a more desirable option.

Methods: This randomized, open-label, active comparator study evaluated the effectiveness (non-inferiority hypothesis) of the beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combination cefoperazone-sulbactam (2-8 g/day), compared with ceftazidime (2-6 g/day)-amikacin (15 mg/kg/day)-metronidazole (500 mg three times daily) in 154 and 152 subjects, respectively, having intra-abdominal infections. The study was conducted at 17 centers in India.

Results: Non-inferiority of cefoperazone-sulbactam (91.9%) compared with ceftazidime-amikacin-metronidazole (81.8%) was demonstrated for continued resolution of clinical signs and symptoms at the 30-day follow-up (primary endpoint) with a treatment difference of 10.1% (95% confidence interval 2.1%, 18.1%; pre-defined non-inferiority limit > -12.5%). Superiority of cefoperazone-sulbactam also was demonstrated for this endpoint, with significantly more subjects achieving continued resolution at the 30-day follow-up than in the comparator group (p = 0.015). On microbiologic outcomes, cefoperazone-sulbactam had higher success rates than ceftazidime-amikacin-metronidazole (92.9% vs. 80.0%). The pathogens (202 isolated) isolated most commonly were Escherichia coli (38.6%) and Klebsiella spp. (12.9%). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was 6.5% and 16.4% in the cefoperazone-sulbactam and ceftazidime-amikacin-metronidazole groups, respectively, with more discontinuations due to treatment-related adverse events in the comparator arm (3.2% vs. 9.9%).

Conclusion: Empirical cefoperazone-sulbactam monotherapy could be a useful adjunct to surgical intervention for intra-abdominal infections.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00360607.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Abdominal Abscess / drug therapy*
  • Abdominal Abscess / microbiology
  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Amikacin / administration & dosage
  • Amikacin / adverse effects
  • Amikacin / therapeutic use
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / administration & dosage
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / therapeutic use*
  • Cefoperazone / administration & dosage
  • Cefoperazone / adverse effects
  • Cefoperazone / therapeutic use*
  • Ceftazidime / administration & dosage
  • Ceftazidime / adverse effects
  • Ceftazidime / therapeutic use
  • Child
  • Drug Therapy, Combination
  • Female
  • Gram-Negative Bacteria / drug effects
  • Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections / drug therapy*
  • Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections / microbiology
  • Humans
  • India
  • Male
  • Metronidazole / administration & dosage
  • Metronidazole / adverse effects
  • Metronidazole / therapeutic use
  • Middle Aged
  • Peritonitis / drug therapy*
  • Peritonitis / microbiology
  • Sulbactam / administration & dosage
  • Sulbactam / adverse effects
  • Sulbactam / therapeutic use*
  • Treatment Failure
  • Treatment Outcome

Substances

  • Anti-Bacterial Agents
  • Metronidazole
  • Cefoperazone
  • Amikacin
  • Ceftazidime
  • Sulbactam

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT00360607