Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2013
Antimicrobial activity against CA-MRSA and treatment of uncomplicated nonpurulent cellulitis.
СтатьяКомментарийНазвание 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.
Griffith Matthew E, Ellis Michael W
Аннотация
UNLABELLED: Evaluation of: Pallin DJ, Binder WD, Allen MB et al.
CLINICAL TRIAL: comparative effectiveness of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus cephalexin alone for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin. Infect. Dis. 56(12), 1754-1762 (2013). The rise of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) has complicated the empirical antimicrobial treatment of cellulitis. CA-MRSA is frequently the cause of purulent infections, to include purulent cellulitis. The role of CA-MRSA in nonpurulent cellulitis is less clear. Published clinical practice guidelines suggest that CA-MRSA plays only a minor role in nonpurulent cellulitis and that initial treatment should be primarily directed at β-hemolytic streptococci. Until now, there have been no data from prospective randomized control trials to support this recommendation. In this review, we examine the findings from a recent prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial that refutes the need for empirical coverage of CA-MRSA when treating nonpurulent cellulitis.
CLINICAL TRIAL: comparative effectiveness of cephalexin plus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus cephalexin alone for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin. Infect. Dis. 56(12), 1754-1762 (2013). The rise of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) has complicated the empirical antimicrobial treatment of cellulitis. CA-MRSA is frequently the cause of purulent infections, to include purulent cellulitis. The role of CA-MRSA in nonpurulent cellulitis is less clear. Published clinical practice guidelines suggest that CA-MRSA plays only a minor role in nonpurulent cellulitis and that initial treatment should be primarily directed at β-hemolytic streptococci. Until now, there have been no data from prospective randomized control trials to support this recommendation. In this review, we examine the findings from a recent prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial that refutes the need for empirical coverage of CA-MRSA when treating nonpurulent cellulitis.