Presse medicale (Paris, France : 1983) · 2001
[Superficial pyoderma requiring oral antibiotic therapy: fusidic acid versus pristinamycin]].
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Claudy A, Groupe Français d'Etude
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study was aimed to compare the clinical and antibacterial efficacy of fusidic acid 500 mg twice a day, per os, over 7.5 days) to pristinamycin 1 g twice a day, per os, over 10 days).
METHODS: Patients aged over 18, suffering from a superficial pyoderma requiring antibiotherapy and having given their informed consent were enrolled in a controlled, multicentre, double blind double dummy, parallel groups study. From day 0 to day 10, the patients received the randomised treatment. Those who were cured at day 11 had a visit at day 25 without any treatment between day 11 and day 25. A swab was performed on days 0, 11 and 25. The two treatment groups were compared in terms of efficacy, safety and global cost.
RESULTS: 334 patients seen in dermatologic consultation were included in the study. 313 patients were analysed on an intent-to-treat basis. 158 received fusidic acid (FA) and 155 were treated with pristinamycin (P). At D11, 126 patients were cured in the FA group (79.7%) and 118 in the P group (76.1%) (p = 0.44). The bacteriological success rate was 85.2% in the FA group and 82.7 in the P group (p = 0.67). The recovery was confirmed in 92.6% of the FA patients and 90.4% of the P patients at D25 (p = 0.56). Digestive tolerance was better with fusidic acid than with pristinamycin. In economic terms, fusidic acid was cheaper than pristinamycin: 443 French francs in the FA group versus 545 FF in the P group.
CONCLUSION: Therefore we conclude that an oral course of 7.5 days with fusidic acid is an efficient and cheaper alternative to a treatment with pristinamycin over 10 days.
METHODS: Patients aged over 18, suffering from a superficial pyoderma requiring antibiotherapy and having given their informed consent were enrolled in a controlled, multicentre, double blind double dummy, parallel groups study. From day 0 to day 10, the patients received the randomised treatment. Those who were cured at day 11 had a visit at day 25 without any treatment between day 11 and day 25. A swab was performed on days 0, 11 and 25. The two treatment groups were compared in terms of efficacy, safety and global cost.
RESULTS: 334 patients seen in dermatologic consultation were included in the study. 313 patients were analysed on an intent-to-treat basis. 158 received fusidic acid (FA) and 155 were treated with pristinamycin (P). At D11, 126 patients were cured in the FA group (79.7%) and 118 in the P group (76.1%) (p = 0.44). The bacteriological success rate was 85.2% in the FA group and 82.7 in the P group (p = 0.67). The recovery was confirmed in 92.6% of the FA patients and 90.4% of the P patients at D25 (p = 0.56). Digestive tolerance was better with fusidic acid than with pristinamycin. In economic terms, fusidic acid was cheaper than pristinamycin: 443 French francs in the FA group versus 545 FF in the P group.
CONCLUSION: Therefore we conclude that an oral course of 7.5 days with fusidic acid is an efficient and cheaper alternative to a treatment with pristinamycin over 10 days.