Comparison of two regimens of oral clindamycin versus dicloxacillin in the treatment of mild-to-moderate skin and soft-tissue infections

Maria Blaszczyk-Kostanecka, A. Dobozy, Luciano Dominguez-Soto, Robinson Guerrero, J. Hunyadi, Julio Lopera, Ciro Maguiña, Adrian C. Peña, Mercedes Prieto, Remedios Fabra-Coronel, Amado Saul, Apichati Sivayathorn, Melecia Velmonte, Frantisek Vosmik, David Zambrano

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This prospective, double-masked, randomized study was performed in 14 centers throughout Asia (The Philippines and Thailand), Latin America (Mexico, Peru, Chile, and Venezuela), and Europe (Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic). Outpatients with acute mild-to-moderate skin and soft- tissue infectious (cellulitis, impetigo, folliculitis, furunculosis and carbuncles without surgical incision, and skin wound infections from trauma) were randomly assigned to one of the following regimens for a total of 7 to 14 days: (1) clindamycin 150 mg four times daily (QID) (CLIN 150); (2) clindamycin 300 mg twice daily (BID) (CLIN 300); or (3) dicloxacillin 250 mg QID (DICLOX). Patients were assessed clinically and bacteriologically at the end of treatment and 2 to 3 weeks after treatment. Study variables included clinical and bacteriologic outcomes. No statistically significant differences in any of the study variables were noted between the treatment groups either at the end of therapy or at follow-up 2 to 3 weeks later. In addition, no statistically significant differences were noted between the three groups regarding adverse events; two patients in the CLIN 150 group had serious adverse events (cachexia due to malnutrition and allergic dermatitis), but both problems were treated and the patients completed the study. Based on these results, we conclude that the two regimens of oral clindamycin showed rates of clinical and microbiologic efficacy similar to those of the standard regimen of oral dicloxacillin.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)341-353
Number of pages13
JournalCurrent Therapeutic Research - Clinical and Experimental
Volume59
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1998

Fingerprint

Dicloxacillin
Soft Tissue Infections
Clindamycin
Skin
Carbuncle
Impetigo
Furunculosis
Folliculitis
Venezuela
Cachexia
Peru
Philippines
Cellulitis
Latin America
Hungary
Chile
Czech Republic
Dermatitis
Wound Infection
Thailand

Keywords

  • Clindamycin
  • Dicloxacillin
  • Skin infections
  • Soft-tissue infections

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Comparison of two regimens of oral clindamycin versus dicloxacillin in the treatment of mild-to-moderate skin and soft-tissue infections. / Blaszczyk-Kostanecka, Maria; Dobozy, A.; Dominguez-Soto, Luciano; Guerrero, Robinson; Hunyadi, J.; Lopera, Julio; Maguiña, Ciro; Peña, Adrian C.; Prieto, Mercedes; Fabra-Coronel, Remedios; Saul, Amado; Sivayathorn, Apichati; Velmonte, Melecia; Vosmik, Frantisek; Zambrano, David.

In: Current Therapeutic Research - Clinical and Experimental, Vol. 59, No. 6, 1998, p. 341-353.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Blaszczyk-Kostanecka, M, Dobozy, A, Dominguez-Soto, L, Guerrero, R, Hunyadi, J, Lopera, J, Maguiña, C, Peña, AC, Prieto, M, Fabra-Coronel, R, Saul, A, Sivayathorn, A, Velmonte, M, Vosmik, F & Zambrano, D 1998, 'Comparison of two regimens of oral clindamycin versus dicloxacillin in the treatment of mild-to-moderate skin and soft-tissue infections', Current Therapeutic Research - Clinical and Experimental, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 341-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-393X(98)85036-4
Blaszczyk-Kostanecka, Maria ; Dobozy, A. ; Dominguez-Soto, Luciano ; Guerrero, Robinson ; Hunyadi, J. ; Lopera, Julio ; Maguiña, Ciro ; Peña, Adrian C. ; Prieto, Mercedes ; Fabra-Coronel, Remedios ; Saul, Amado ; Sivayathorn, Apichati ; Velmonte, Melecia ; Vosmik, Frantisek ; Zambrano, David. / Comparison of two regimens of oral clindamycin versus dicloxacillin in the treatment of mild-to-moderate skin and soft-tissue infections. In: Current Therapeutic Research - Clinical and Experimental. 1998 ; Vol. 59, No. 6. pp. 341-353.
@article{eb6d0b1161a34652ac7142427154637b,
title = "Comparison of two regimens of oral clindamycin versus dicloxacillin in the treatment of mild-to-moderate skin and soft-tissue infections",
abstract = "This prospective, double-masked, randomized study was performed in 14 centers throughout Asia (The Philippines and Thailand), Latin America (Mexico, Peru, Chile, and Venezuela), and Europe (Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic). Outpatients with acute mild-to-moderate skin and soft- tissue infectious (cellulitis, impetigo, folliculitis, furunculosis and carbuncles without surgical incision, and skin wound infections from trauma) were randomly assigned to one of the following regimens for a total of 7 to 14 days: (1) clindamycin 150 mg four times daily (QID) (CLIN 150); (2) clindamycin 300 mg twice daily (BID) (CLIN 300); or (3) dicloxacillin 250 mg QID (DICLOX). Patients were assessed clinically and bacteriologically at the end of treatment and 2 to 3 weeks after treatment. Study variables included clinical and bacteriologic outcomes. No statistically significant differences in any of the study variables were noted between the treatment groups either at the end of therapy or at follow-up 2 to 3 weeks later. In addition, no statistically significant differences were noted between the three groups regarding adverse events; two patients in the CLIN 150 group had serious adverse events (cachexia due to malnutrition and allergic dermatitis), but both problems were treated and the patients completed the study. Based on these results, we conclude that the two regimens of oral clindamycin showed rates of clinical and microbiologic efficacy similar to those of the standard regimen of oral dicloxacillin.",
keywords = "Clindamycin, Dicloxacillin, Skin infections, Soft-tissue infections",
author = "Maria Blaszczyk-Kostanecka and A. Dobozy and Luciano Dominguez-Soto and Robinson Guerrero and J. Hunyadi and Julio Lopera and Ciro Magui{\~n}a and Pe{\~n}a, {Adrian C.} and Mercedes Prieto and Remedios Fabra-Coronel and Amado Saul and Apichati Sivayathorn and Melecia Velmonte and Frantisek Vosmik and David Zambrano",
year = "1998",
doi = "10.1016/S0011-393X(98)85036-4",
language = "English",
volume = "59",
pages = "341--353",
journal = "Current Therapeutic Research",
issn = "0011-393X",
publisher = "Excerpta Medica",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of two regimens of oral clindamycin versus dicloxacillin in the treatment of mild-to-moderate skin and soft-tissue infections

AU - Blaszczyk-Kostanecka, Maria

AU - Dobozy, A.

AU - Dominguez-Soto, Luciano

AU - Guerrero, Robinson

AU - Hunyadi, J.

AU - Lopera, Julio

AU - Maguiña, Ciro

AU - Peña, Adrian C.

AU - Prieto, Mercedes

AU - Fabra-Coronel, Remedios

AU - Saul, Amado

AU - Sivayathorn, Apichati

AU - Velmonte, Melecia

AU - Vosmik, Frantisek

AU - Zambrano, David

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - This prospective, double-masked, randomized study was performed in 14 centers throughout Asia (The Philippines and Thailand), Latin America (Mexico, Peru, Chile, and Venezuela), and Europe (Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic). Outpatients with acute mild-to-moderate skin and soft- tissue infectious (cellulitis, impetigo, folliculitis, furunculosis and carbuncles without surgical incision, and skin wound infections from trauma) were randomly assigned to one of the following regimens for a total of 7 to 14 days: (1) clindamycin 150 mg four times daily (QID) (CLIN 150); (2) clindamycin 300 mg twice daily (BID) (CLIN 300); or (3) dicloxacillin 250 mg QID (DICLOX). Patients were assessed clinically and bacteriologically at the end of treatment and 2 to 3 weeks after treatment. Study variables included clinical and bacteriologic outcomes. No statistically significant differences in any of the study variables were noted between the treatment groups either at the end of therapy or at follow-up 2 to 3 weeks later. In addition, no statistically significant differences were noted between the three groups regarding adverse events; two patients in the CLIN 150 group had serious adverse events (cachexia due to malnutrition and allergic dermatitis), but both problems were treated and the patients completed the study. Based on these results, we conclude that the two regimens of oral clindamycin showed rates of clinical and microbiologic efficacy similar to those of the standard regimen of oral dicloxacillin.

AB - This prospective, double-masked, randomized study was performed in 14 centers throughout Asia (The Philippines and Thailand), Latin America (Mexico, Peru, Chile, and Venezuela), and Europe (Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic). Outpatients with acute mild-to-moderate skin and soft- tissue infectious (cellulitis, impetigo, folliculitis, furunculosis and carbuncles without surgical incision, and skin wound infections from trauma) were randomly assigned to one of the following regimens for a total of 7 to 14 days: (1) clindamycin 150 mg four times daily (QID) (CLIN 150); (2) clindamycin 300 mg twice daily (BID) (CLIN 300); or (3) dicloxacillin 250 mg QID (DICLOX). Patients were assessed clinically and bacteriologically at the end of treatment and 2 to 3 weeks after treatment. Study variables included clinical and bacteriologic outcomes. No statistically significant differences in any of the study variables were noted between the treatment groups either at the end of therapy or at follow-up 2 to 3 weeks later. In addition, no statistically significant differences were noted between the three groups regarding adverse events; two patients in the CLIN 150 group had serious adverse events (cachexia due to malnutrition and allergic dermatitis), but both problems were treated and the patients completed the study. Based on these results, we conclude that the two regimens of oral clindamycin showed rates of clinical and microbiologic efficacy similar to those of the standard regimen of oral dicloxacillin.

KW - Clindamycin

KW - Dicloxacillin

KW - Skin infections

KW - Soft-tissue infections

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=7144227300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=7144227300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0011-393X(98)85036-4

DO - 10.1016/S0011-393X(98)85036-4

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:7144227300

VL - 59

SP - 341

EP - 353

JO - Current Therapeutic Research

JF - Current Therapeutic Research

SN - 0011-393X

IS - 6

ER -