Meropenem compared with ceftazidime in the empiric treatment of acute severe infections in hospitalized children

N. Principi, P. Marchisio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In a multicenter, randomized, open comparison of meropenem to ceftazidime as empiric treatment of severe acute infections, 185 children (1 mo-15 years old, mean 65.4 mo) were enrolled. Meropenem (20 mg/kg t.i.d. i.v.) was given to 98 and ceftazidime (10-30 mg/kg t.i.d. i.v.) to 87 children, generally for 5 to 10 days (mean: 6.9 for meropenem and 7.5 for ceftazidime). Clinical response was evaluated at the beginning and at the end of therapy and 4 weeks later (follow-up). Clinical response was deemed satisfactory at the end of therapy in 96.7% of the patients treated with meropenem and in 95.3% of those who received ceftazidime without any statistically significant difference. One relapse occurred in a meropenem-treated patient at the follow-up clinical assessment. The baseline infecting organism was eradicated or presumed eradicated at the end of therapy in 14/16 patients treated with meropenem and in 14/15 treated with ceftazidime. The incidence of drug-related adverse events (mostly a slight increase in liver enzymes) was 9.2% in the meropenem group and 4.6% in the ceftazidime group. Our data show that meropenem is as effective as ceftazidime in the empiric treatment of severe infections in infants and children.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)108-113
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Chemotherapy
Volume10
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1998

Keywords

  • Ceftazidime
  • Children
  • Empiric antibiotic treatment
  • Meropenem
  • Pediatric infections
  • Pediatric patients

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Microbiology (medical)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Meropenem compared with ceftazidime in the empiric treatment of acute severe infections in hospitalized children'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this