Comparison of single-dose treatment with norfloxacin and standard 5-day treatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for acute shigellosis in adults.
Abstract
Comparison of single-dose treatment with norfloxacin and standard 5-day treatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for acute shigellosis in adults. E Gotuzzo , R A Oberhelman , C Maguiña , S J Berry , A Yi , M Guzman , R Ruiz , R Leon-Barua and R B Sack Instituto de Medicina Tropical Alexander von Humboldt, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru. ABSTRACT Shigellae have been shown to be highly susceptible to new quinolone agents, with average MICs for 90% of isolates of less than 0.1 microgram/ml. Because these agents also reach high concentrations in the stool after a single dose, the effectiveness of a single 800-mg dose of norfloxacin and of 5-day treatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) were compared in a randomized trial. Patients with clinical dysentery received one of these treatment regimens, and clinical data and follow-up culture results were analyzed for patients whose stool culture on presentation grew shigellae. When 55 patients with shigellosis (26 treated with TMP-SMX, 29 treated with norfloxacin) whose bacterial isolates were susceptible to the antibiotic given were compared by treatment group, no significant differences were seen in days of illness (mean, 2.5 +/- 0.65 days with TMP-SMX and 2.0 +/- 0.47 days with norfloxacin; P = 0.200) or number of unformed stools after starting treatment (mean, 9.7 +/- 2.37 stools with TMP-SMX and 7.6 +/- 3.19 stools with norfloxacin; P = 0.312). Resistance in vitro to TMP-SMX was seen in 15% of Shigella isolates, whereas none was resistant to norfloxacin. Bacteriologic failure was found in 1 patient among 24 receiving TMP-SMX and in none of 25 patients receiving norfloxacin. One single dose of norfloxacin was as effective as 5 days of treatment with TMP-SMX in these adults with shigellosis. CiteULike Connotea Delicious Digg Facebook Google+ Mendeley Reddit StumbleUpon Twitter What's this? « Previous | Next Article » Table of Contents This Article doi: 10.1128/AAC.33.7.1101 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. July 1989 vol. 33 no. 7 1101-1104 » Abstract PDF Classifications Research Article Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in ASM journals Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of AAC Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Load citing article information Citing articles via Web of Science Citing articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Gotuzzo, E. Articles by Sack, R. B. Search for related content PubMed PubMed citation Articles by Gotuzzo, E. Articles by Sack, R. B. Related Content Load related web page information Social Bookmarking CiteULike Connotea Delicious Digg Facebook Google+ Mendeley Reddit StumbleUpon Twitter What's this? current issue December 2011, volume 55, issue 12 Alert me to new issues of AAC About AAC Subscribers Authors Reviewers Advertisers Inquiries from the Press Permissions & Commercial Reprints ASM Journals Public Access Policy AAC RSS Feeds 1752 N Street N.W. • Washington DC 20036 202.737.3600 • 202.942.9355 fax • journals@asmusa.org Print ISSN: 0066-4804 Online ISSN: 1098-6596 Copyright © 2011 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to AAC .asm.org, visit: http://intl- AAC .asm.org | More Info» var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www."); document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E")); var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-5821458-3"); pageTracker._trackPageview();