Skip to main content
Log in

Activity of cefroxadine and cephalexin in urinary tract infections: A double-blind comparative study

Die Wirksamkeit von Cefroxadin und Cephalexin bei Harnwegsinfektionen: Eine doppelblinde Vergleichsstudie

  • Originalia
  • Published:
Infection Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Cefroxadine and cephalexin were compared in a double-blind study in patients with established, complicated urinary tract infections. The patients were treated orally with 1 g t.i.d. for five days. Bacterial counts in the urine were determined one, three and eight hours after the first dose and on the second, third and fifth days of treatment. A significant reduction in the bacterial count was seen one and three hours after the first dose and to a much greater extent eight hours after the dose. Reductions in the bacterial count were more frequent in the group treated with cefroxadine. The results during the first eight hours indicate that cefroxadine kills more rapidly than cephalexin; this is in agreement with the experimental findings. It is still uncertain whether the transient differences observed in the rates of inhibition are of clinical relevance.

Zusammenfassung

Bei Patienten mit nachgewiesener, komplizierter Harnwegsinfektion wurden Cefroxadin und Cephalexin in einer Doppelblindstudie miteinander verglichen. Die Patienten erhielten dreimal täglich 1 g per os, fünf Tage lang. Die Keimzahlen im Urin wurden eine, drei und acht Stunden nach der ersten Dosis und am zweiten, dritten und fünften Behandlungstag bestimmt. Eine eindeutige Reduktion der Keimzahlen war bereits eine und drei Stunden nach der ersten Dosis festzustellen sowie, in viel größerem Ausmaß, nach acht Stunden. Der Rückgang der Keimzahl war in der mit Cefroxadin behandelten Gruppe häufiger. Die Resultate innerhalb der ersten acht Stunden besagen, daß Cefroxadin rascher bakterizid wirkt als Cephalexin, was mit den experimentellen Befunden im Einklang steht. Ob die beobachteten, vorübergehenden Unterschiede im Ansprechen auf die beiden Präparate klinisch von Bedeutung sind, bleibt ungewiß.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  1. Hunter, P. A., Rolinson, G. N., Witting, D. A. Comparative activity of amoxycillin and ampicillin in an experimental bacterial infection in mice. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 4 (1973) 285–293.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rolinson, G. N., Macdonald, A. C., Wilson, D. A. Bactericidal action of β-lactam antibiotics onEscherichia coli with particular reference to ampicillin and amoxycillin. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 3 (1977) 541–553.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Comber, K. R., Boon, R. J., Sutherland, R. Comparative effects of amoxycillin and ampicillin on the morphology ofEscherichia coli in vivo and correlation with activity. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 12 (1977) 736–744.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zak, O., Vischer, W. A., Schenk, C., Tosch, W., Zimmermann, W., Regös, J., Suter, E. R., Kradolfer, F., Gelzer, J. CGP 9000: A new orally active, broad-spectrum cephalosporin. J. Antibiot. 29 (1976) 653–655.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Zak, O., Tosch, W., Vischer, W. A., Kradolfer, F. Comparative experimental studies on 3-methoxy and 3-methyl cephems. Drugs Exp. Clin. Res. 3 (1977) 11–20.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Vischer, W. A., Zak, O., Konopka, E. A., Fehimann, H., Regös, J., Tosch, W.: Experimental evaluation of CGP 9000, a new orally active cephalosporin. Curr. Chemother. (1978) 825–827.

  7. Cowan, S. T., Steel, K. J. Manual for the identification of medical bacteria. 2nd ed. Revised byCowan, S. T., Cambridge University Press, London 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ericsson, H. M., Sherris, J. C. Antibiotic sensitivity testing. Acta. Pathol. Microbiol. Scand. Section B 79B Suppl. 217 (1971) 1–90.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Steers, E., Foltz, E. L., Graves, B. S. An inocula replicating apparatus for routine testing of bacterial susceptibility to antibiotics. Antibiot. Chemother. 9 (1959) 307–311.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Waisbren, B. A. The proof of efficacy of antibiotics. Am. J. Med. Sci. 250 (1965) 406–423.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Acar, J. F. Dynamique de la bactériurie dans les infections urinaires à bacilles gram négatifs traîtées par les antibiotiques. Pathol. Biol. 17 (1969) 859–864.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Naber, K., Ahrens, T., Zimmermann, W., Puppel, H., Schultheiss, H., Maly, V. Klinische Bedeutung der β-Laktamase-Produktion von Bakterien bei der Therapie der Harnwegsinfektionen mit oralen β-Laktam-Antibiotika. Urologe A 21 (1982) 225–228.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ahrens, T., Naber, K.G. Activity of cefroxadine and cephalexin in urinary tract infections: A double-blind comparative study. Infection 11, 25–30 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01651353

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01651353

Keywords

Navigation