Comparative Efficacy of Topical Combination of Bacitracin and Neomycin vs. Chloramphenicol in the Treatment of Uncomplicated Mild to Moderate Surgical Skin and Soft Tissue Infections in Adult Out-patients | CMAC

Comparative Efficacy of Topical Combination of Bacitracin and Neomycin vs. Chloramphenicol in the Treatment of Uncomplicated Mild to Moderate Surgical Skin and Soft Tissue Infections in Adult Out-patients

Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2013; 15(2):131-142

​ Belkova Yu.А., Kozlov R.S., Krechikova O.I., Sukhorukova M.V., Bezuglyy A.V., Berezhanskiy B.V., Vavulov Y.A., Zhorova E.M., Zubareva N.A., Rozanova S.M., Frolov V.V., Belkov A.V.
surgical skin and soft tissue infection SSTI bacitracin neomycin chloramphenicol
Section
Antimicrobials
Type
Journal article
Publication
Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2013; 15(2):131-142

Objective.

To assess clinical efficacy and safety of topical combination of bacitracin and neomycin in comparison to topical chloramphenicol in the treatment of uncomplicated mild to moderate surgical skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) in adult out-patients.

Materials and Methods.

A total of 309 adult patients with mild to moderate SSSTI were randomized to receive either topical powder and/or ointment of bacitracin+neomycin (n=156) or topical 0.75% chloramphenicol ointment (n=153) BID. Deep swabs were performed in all patients before the start of antibacterial therapy. Identification of pathogens and susceptibility testing were performed according to EUCAST guidelines, 2012.

Results.

The total cure rate was comparable in bacitracin + neomycin group and chloramphenicol group (97.4% for both regimens, p=0.98), but cure period was significantly shorter for bacitracin + neomycin regimen (cure rate by day 8 – 82.7% vs. 68.6%, р=0.004; by day 15 – 97.4% vs. 94.8%, respectively, р=0.23). The main causative agent of SSSTI was Staphylococcus aureus (82.5%), less frequently Streptococcus pyogenes (5.3%), Enterococcus faecalis (1.8%), Escherichia coli (1.3%), Streptococcus agalactiae (1.3%) and other (<1% each). 22% of S. aureus strains were resistant to chloramphenicol, 7.7% to tetracycline, 7.2% to macrolides, 3.3% to ciprofloxacin, 2.2% to clindamycin and gentamicin, 1.7% to oxacillin, mupirocin and chloramphenicol, 1.1% to fusidic acid and moxifloxacin, 0.6% to co-trimoxazole, while all isolated strains were susceptible to vancomycin and linezolid.

Conclusions.

Topical bacitracin+neomycin has high clinical efficacy in the treatment of uncomplicated mild to moderate surgical SSTI with significantly more rapid recovery in comparison to topical chloramphenicol and therefore can be recommended for the treatment of this group of infections in adult out-patients.

  • 1. Новоселов В.С., Плиева Л.Р. Пиодермии. РМЖ 2004; 12(5):327-35.
  • 2. Jones M.E., Karlowsky J.A., Draghi D.C., et al. Epidemiology and antibiotic susceptibility of bacteria causing skin and soft tissue infections in the USA and Europe: a guide to appropriate antimicrobial treatment. Int J Antimicrob Agent 2003; 22:406-19.
  • 3. Korting H.C., Neubert U., Abeck D. Current antimicrobial susceptibility of cutaneous bacteria to first line antibiotics. Int J Antimicrob Agents 1998; 10(2):165-8.
  • 4. Девятов В.А., Приб А.Н., Козлов А.В. и др. Пути улучшения амбулаторной помощи больным с хирургической инфекцией. Хирургия 1993; 4:79.
  • 5. Stevens D.L., Bisno A.L., Chambers H.F., et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft-tissue infections. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:1373-406.
  • 6. Doern G.V., Jones R.N., Pfaller M., Kugler K., Beach M.L. and The SENTRY study group. Bacterial pathogens isolated from patients with skin and soft tissue infections: frequency of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns from SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program (USA and Canada, 1997). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1999; 34:65-72.
  • 7. Страчунский Л.С., Дехнич А.В., Белькова Ю.А., группа исследователей проекта СтЭнт. Сравнительная активность антибактериальных препаратов, входящих в лекарственные формы для местного применения, в отношении Staphylococcus aureus: результаты российского многоцентрового исследования. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2002; 4(2):157-63.
  • 8. Stratchounski L.S., Belkova J.A., Cigankova E.P., Sukhorukova M.V., Ivanchik N.V. Etiology and аntimicrobial resistance of pathogens of skin and soft tissue infections in outpatients: results of first prospective study in Russia. J Chemother 2005; 17(Suppl. 3):73-4.
  • 9. Козлов Р.С., Сивая О.В., Шпынев К.В. и соавт. Антибиотикорезистентность Streptococcus pyogenes в России: результаты многоцентрового проспективного исследования ПеГАС-I. Клин микробиол антимикроб химиотер 2002; 4(2):154-67.
  • 10. Winkelman W., Gratton D. Topical antibacterials. Clin Dermatol 1989; 7(3):156-62.
  • 11. Afset J.E., Maeland J.A. Susceptibility of skin and softtissue isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes to topical antibiotics: indications of clonal spread of fusidic acid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Scand J Infect Dis 2003; 35(2):84-9.
  • 12. Jones R.N., Li Q., Kohut B., Biedenbach D.J., Bell J., Turnidge J.D. Contemporary antimicrobial activity of triple antibiotic ointment: a multiphased study of recent clinical isolates in the United States and Australia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 54(1):63-71.
  • 13. Ferrara A., Grassi G., Piccioni P.D. et al. In vitro antibacterial activity of neomycin, bacitracin and a combination of both. G Ital Chemioter 1989; 36:1/3:45-52.
  • 14. Хорук С.М., Кречиков В.А. Результаты применения комбинированного препарата бацитрацин+неомицин в послеоперационном периоде при проведении косметических операций по восстановлению дефектов мягких тканей челюстно-лицевой области. Хирургия 2008; 12:47-50.
  • 15. Паршина В.Л. Профилактика и лечение гнойно-септических заболеваний кожи, подкожной клетчатки и пупочной ранки в практике неонатальной реанимации. Consilium Medicum (педиатрия) 2007; 1:4-8.
  • 16. Богданец Л.И., Березина С.С., Гельфанд Е.Б. Место и эффективность антимикробных средств в лечении трофических язв у больных с венозной недостаточностью нижних конечностей. Инфекции в хирургии 2007; 5(2):39-42.
  • 17. Livingston D.H., Cryer H.G., Miller F.B., et al. A randomized prospective study of topical antimicrobial agents on skin grafts after thermal injury. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990; 86(6):1059-64.
  • 18. Техника сбора и транспортирования биоматериалов в микробиологические лаборатории. МУ 4.2.2039-05 от 23.12.2005.
  • 19. Определение чувствительности микроорганизмов к антибактериальным препаратам. Методические указания МУ 4.2.1890-04 от 04.03.2004.
  • 20. Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook. GarciaL.S., editor. 3rd Ed. ASM Press, Washington, D.C., 2010.
  • 21. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters, 2012. URL:www.eucast.org/clinical_breakpoints.
  • 22. Хирургические инфекции кожи и мягких тканей. Российские национальные рекомендации. 2009.
  • 23. Suzuki M., Yamada K., Nagao M., et al. Antimicrobial ointments and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus USA300. Emerg Infect Dis 2011; 17(10):1917-20.
  • 24. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Neomycin/Staphylococcus aureus EUCAST MIC Distribution – Reference Database 2013-02-
  • 25. URL: mic.eucast.org/Eucast2/regShow.jsp?Id=9628 25. Rajendran P.M., Young D., Maurer T., et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of cephalexin for treatment of uncomplicated skin abscesses in a population at risk for community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51(11):4044-8.
  • 26. Llera J.L., Levy R.C. Treatment of cutaneous abscess: a double-blind clinical study. Ann Emerg Med 1985; 14(1):15-9.
Views
0 Abstract
0 PDF
0 Crossref citations
Shared