Chest ACCP Education Calendar
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Phillips, H
Right arrow Articles by Todd, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Phillips, H
Right arrow Articles by Todd, W.

Chest, Vol 104, 1387-1392, Copyright © 1993 by American College of Chest Physicians


ARTICLES

A comparison of cefpodoxime proxetil and cefaclor in the treatment of acute exacerbation of COPD in adults

H Phillips, CJ Van Hook, T Butler and WM Todd
Columbiana Clinic of Family Medicine, Ala.

In this multicenter, observer-blinded study, 301 patients with signs and symptoms of acute bacterial exacerbation of COPD were randomized (2:1) to receive either cefpodoxime proxetil (200 mg, bid) or cefaclor (250 mg, tid) for 10 days. Clinical and microbiologic evaluations were performed before treatment, during therapy (study days 3 to 5), at the end of therapy (3 to 7 days posttreatment), and at long-term follow-up (4 weeks posttreatment). The most common pretreatment isolates were Haemophilus influenzae, Haemophilus parainfluenzae, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Significantly (p < 0.001) more bacterial isolates were susceptible in vitro to cefpodoxime (233 of 256, 91 percent) than to cefaclor (215 of 255, 84 percent). There were no statistically significant differences between the two drug regimens in eradication of the initial pathogen (cefpodoxime, 116 of 128, 91 percent; cefaclor, 59 of 64, 92 percent) or end-of-therapy clinical response (cure + proved; cefpodoxime, 99 of 100, 99 percent; cefaclor, 45 of 49, 92 percent) rates for evaluable patients. Both drug treatments were well-tolerated, with a similar incidence of drug-related adverse events (cefpodoxime 11 percent, cefaclor 12 percent). Cefpodoxime (bid) was as safe and effective as cefaclor (tid) in the treatment of acute exacerbation of COPD. The less frequent dosing regimen of cefpodoxime may improve patient compliance compared to those antibiotics that require three or four daily doses.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ChestHome page
J. V. Hirschmann
Do Bacteria Cause Exacerbations of COPD?
Chest, July 1, 2000; 118(1): 193 - 203.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American College of Chest Physicians.