We compared intravenously administered ciprofloxacin (CPFX) with ceftazidime (CAZ) in a randomized, well-controlled manner in terms of clinical efficacy, safety and usefulness. Patients with moderate to severe bacterial pneumonia received either CPFX 300 mg b.i.d. or CAZ 2g b.i.d. intravenously for 14 days. The following results were obtained in this trial:
1. A total of 201 patients were enrolled in this study. The cases evaluable for clinical efficacy, safety and usefulness were 91, 98 and 95 in the CPFX group, and 75, 87 and 80 in the CAZ group, respectively. Although a statistical bias was found in the severity of infections, it had no effect on the evaluation of clinical efficacy.
2. The clinical efficacy rate was 85.7%(78/91) in the CPFX group and 84.0%(63/75) in the CAZ group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups, and the statistical equivalence between them was shown at Δ=10%.
3. The elimination rate of causative organisms was 78.9%(30/38) in the CPFX group and 100%(28/28) in the CAZ group. Statistical significance was demonstrated between these values (p=0.017, Fisher's exact test).
4. Side effects were noted in 11.1%(11/99) in the CPFX group and 13.8%(12/87) in the CAZ group. The major events were local reactions at injection sites, hypersensitivity symptoms and central nervous system disorders.
5. Abnormal laboratory findings were detected in 22.3%(21/94) in the CPFX group and 29.4%(25/85) in the CAZ group. The major events were eosinophilia and elevation of transaminases.
6. The safety rate was 70.4%(69/98) in the CPFX group and 63.2%(55/87) in the CAZ group. There was no significant difference between these values.
7. The ratios judged as better than useful in the CPFX and CAZ groups were 76.8%(73/95) and 77.2%(61/80), respectively, not significantly different.
These results indicate that CPFX is a highly effective drug for the treatment of bacterial pneumonia.
View full abstract