Evidence Hub

Oral ciprofloxacin in refractory gram-negative bacillary infections

Bryant RE, Hartstein AI

International journal of clinical pharmacology research, 1987

13 participants

Abstract

The 13 patients included in this series: had chronic Gram-negative bacillary infections that were refractory to prior antibiotic therapy; were unable or unwilling to receive intravenous antibiotics; and had altered host defenses or environmental factors that contributed to persistent infection. Five patients had chronic polymicrobic Gram-negative osteomyelitis, three had urinary tract infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, two had Pseudomonas skin infections and three had respiratory tract infections with Gram-negative bacilli. The overall bacteriological cure rate for Gram-negative bacilli was four of five osteomyelitis, all three urinary tract infections, both skin infections and one out of three respiratory infections. Secondary infections occurred in two patients with bone infections, one with prostatitis and one with deep seated cellulitis and myonecrosis. Two patients with end-stage lung disease had emergence of resistant strains during therapy. Ciprofloxacin was well tolerated and effective in most of the ambulatory patients with refractory Gram-negative bacillary infection. It appears to be especially promising for Pseudomonas infections of the bone, urinary tract and soft tissue.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 13 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