Evidence Hub

Randomised clinical trial of moxifloxacin versus ertapenem in complicated intra-abdominal infections: results of the PROMISE study

J. De Waele, J. Tellado, J. Alder, P. Reimnitz, M. Jensen, B. Hampel, P. Arvis

International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 2013

830 participants · 20 citations

Abstract

Antibiotic therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) should provide broad-spectrum coverage both Gram-positive and Gram-negative microorganisms. The PROMISE study compared the clinical and bacteriological efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin versus ertapenem for the treatment of cIAIs. This randomised, prospective, double-dummy, double-blind, multicentre trial was designed as a non-inferiority study. The safety and efficacy of 5-14 days of daily intravenous moxifloxacin (400mg) or ertapenem (1g) were compared in patients with cIAIs requiring surgery and parenteral antibiotic therapy. The primary and secondary endpoints included clinical and bacteriological responses at 21-28 days after the end of treatment (TOC), respectively. Of 830 enrolled patients, 699 were efficacy valid. Moxifloxacin was non-inferior to ertapenem regarding clinical success [89.5% (315/352) versus 93.4% (324/347); 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.9%, 0.4%]. There were no significant differences between groups for any of the primary causes or types of cIAI regarding clinical response. Bacteriological success was achieved in 86.5% (257/297) of moxifloxacin-treated patients and 90.2% (249/276) of ertapenem-treated patients (95% CI -9.0%, 1.5%). There were no major differences between groups regarding the frequency or types of organisms eradicated. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was higher with moxifloxacin than ertapenem (P=0.039), however a similar number of drug-related AEs was seen…

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: 830 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