Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intraabdominal infections requiring surgery

  • Notes
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In a prospective randomized study meropenem was compared with imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of 62 patients with intraabdominal infections requiring surgery. The patients were suffering from diffuse or local peritonitis of moderate severity complicating in most cases gangrenous appendicitis, stomach perforation or gall-bladder disease. There were 30 patients in the meropenem group and 32 patients in the imipenem/cilastatin group. Both antibiotic regimens were given intravenously at a dosage of 1 g every 8 h for a mean duration of 7.7 days in the meropenem group versus 8.6 days in the imipenem/cilastatin group. Fifty-nine aerobic strains and 15 anaerobic strains were isolated from cultures of pus taken intraoperatively, the meropenem MICs ranging from ≤ 0.25 to 2 µg/ml. At follow-up at least one month after treatment the outcome was considered successful in all of 27 evaluable patients given meropenem and in all of 29 evaluable patients given imipenem/cilastatin. Both antibiotic regimens were well tolerated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Edwards JR, Turner PJ, Wannop C, Withnell ES, Grindey AJ, Nairn K In vitro antibacterial activity of SM-7338, a carbapenem antibiotic with stability to dehydropeptidase I. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 1989, 33: 215–222.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nord CE, Lindmark A, Persson I Susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria to meropenem. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1989, 24, Supplement A: 113–117.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Voutsinas D, Mavroudis T, Avlamis A, Giamarellou H In vitro activity of meropenem a new carbapenem against multiresistantPseudomonas aeruginosa compared with that of other antipseudomonal antimicrobials. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1989, 24, Supplement A: 143–147.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nilsson-Ehle I, Hutchison M, Haworth SJ, Norrby SR Pharmacokinetics of meropenem compared to imipenem/cilastatin in young, healthy males. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 1991, 10: 85–88.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Patel JB, Giles RE Meropenem: evidence of lack of proconvulsive tendency in mice. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1989, 24, Supplement A: 307–309.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Topham JC, Murgatroyd LB, Jones DV, Goonetilleke URP, Wright J Safety evaluation of meropenem in animals: studies on the kidney. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1989, 24, Supplement A: 287–306.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lami JL, Wilson SE, Hopkins JA Adjunctive antimicrobials in surgery of soft tissue infections. American Surgeon 1991, 57: 769–774.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sutter SL, Citron DM, Finegold SM: Wadsworth anaerobic bacteriology manual CV Mosby, St. Louis, 1980.

  9. Giamarellou H, Tsagarakis J, Daikos GK Moxalactam in serious infections. Clinical, bacteriologic and pharmacokinetic studies. Reviews of Infectious Diseases 1982, 4, Supplement: 629–638.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Tally FP, Gorbach SL Therapy of mixed anaerobic-aerobic infection. Lessons from studies in intra-abdominal sepsis. American Journal of Medicine 1986, 78, Supplement 6A: 137–145.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Berkeley AS, Freedman K, Hirsch J, Ledger WJ Imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of obstetric and gynecologic infections. American Journal of Medicine 1986, 78, Supplement 6A: 71–76.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Solomkin JS, Fant WK, Rivera JO, Alexander JW Randomized trial of imipenem/cilastatin versus gentamicin and clindamycin in mixed flora infections. American Journal of Medicine 1985, 78, Supplement 6A: 77–83.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Scandinavian Study Group Imipenem/cilastatin versus gentamicin/clindamycin for treatment of serious bacterial infections. Lancet 1984, i: 868–871.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Calandra GB, Brown KR, Grad LC, Ahonkhai VI, Wang C, Azir MA Review of adverse experience and tolerability in the first 2516 patients treated with imipenem/cilastatin. American Journal of Medicine 1985, 78, Supplement 6A: 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Meyers BR Comparative toxicities of third-generation cephalosporins. American Journal of Medicine 1985, 78, Supplement 2A: 96–103.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1st Department of Propedeutic Medicine, Athens University School of Medicine, Laiko General Hospital, 11527, Athens, Greece

    K. Kanellakopoulou, H. Giamarellou, P. Papadothomakos, H. Tsipras, J. Chloroyiannis, R. Theakou & P. Sfikakis

Authors
  1. K. Kanellakopoulou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. Giamarellou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Papadothomakos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. Tsipras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Chloroyiannis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. R. Theakou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. P. Sfikakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kanellakopoulou, K., Giamarellou, H., Papadothomakos, P. et al. Meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of intraabdominal infections requiring surgery. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 12, 449–453 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01967440

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01967440

Keywords

Search

Navigation