Evidence Hub

Treatment of complicated urinary tract infection and acute pyelonephritis by short-course intravenous levofloxacin (750 mg/day) or conventional intravenous/oral levofloxacin (500 mg/day): prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled, multicenter, non-inferiority clinical trial

Ren H, Li X, Ni ZH, Niu JY, Cao B, Xu J, Cheng H, Tu XW et al.

International urology and nephrology, 2017

500 participants · 26 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of short-course intravenous levofloxacin (LVFX) 750 mg with a conventional intravenous/oral regimen of LVFX 500 mg in patients from China with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) and acute pyelonephritis (APN).

METHODS: This was a prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled, multicenter, non-inferiority clinical trial. Patients with cUTI and APN were randomly assigned to a short-course therapy group (intravenous LVFX at750 mg/day for 5 days) or a conventional therapy group (intravenous/oral regimen of LVFX at 500 mg/day for 7-14 days). The clinical, laboratory, and microbiological results were evaluated for efficacy and safety.

RESULTS: The median dose of LVFX was 3555.4 mg in the short-course therapy group and 4874.2 mg in the conventional therapy group. Intention-to-treat analysis indicated the clinical effectiveness in the short-course therapy group (89.87%, 142/158) was non-inferior to that in the conventional therapy group (89.31%, 142/159). The microbiological effectiveness rates were also similar (short-course therapy: 89.55%, 60/67; conventional therapy: 86.30%, 63/73; p > 0.05). There were no significant differences in other parameters, including clinical and microbiological recurrence rates. The incidence of adverse effects and drug-related adverse effects were also similar for the short-course therapy group (21.95%, 36/164; 18.90%, 31/164) and the conventional therapy group (23.03%, 38/165; 15.76%,…

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: 500 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