Evidence Hub

Levofloxacin in the empirical treatment of patients with suspected bacteraemia/sepsis: comparison with imipenem/cilastatin in an open, randomized trial

A. Geddes, Michael Thaler, Slavko Schönwald, Mauno Härkönen, F. Jacobs, IRENE K. NOWOTNY

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 1999

503 participants · 38 citations

Abstract

An open, randomized, multinational, multicentre study was conducted to compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily with imipenem/cilastatin 1 g iv three-times daily in the treatment of hospitalized adult patients with clinically suspected bacteraemia/ sepsis. Levofloxacin patients could change from iv to oral administration after a minimum of 48 h iv treatment if clinical signs and symptoms of sepsis had improved. The primary efficacy analysis was based on the clinical and bacteriological response at clinical endpoint. A total of 503 patients were randomized and 499 included in the intent-to-treat population. The per-protocol population comprised 287 patients with bacteriologically proven infection. Clinical cure rates at clinical endpoint in the intent-to-treat population and per-protocol population were 77% (184/239) and 89% (125/140), respectively, for levofloxacin and 68% (178/260) and 85% (125/147), respectively, for imipenem/cilastatin. At follow-up, the cure rates in the per-protocol population were 84% for levofloxacin and 69% for imipenem/cilastatin. The 95% confidence interval for both populations showed that levofloxacin was as effective as imipenem/cilastatin. A satisfactory bacteriological response was obtained in 87% (96/110) of levofloxacin patients and 84% (97/116) of imipenem/cilastatin patients at clinical endpoint. Adverse events possibly related to the study drug were reported in 74 (31%) levofloxacin patients and 79…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 503 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free