The Annals New | Pharmaco Epidemiology and Therapeutic Risk Management
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 362-364.
© 1993 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation


Research Articles

Intravenous ciprofloxacin: a position statement by the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists

Intravenous ciprofloxacin is approved for the treatment of urinary tract, bone and joint, skin and soft tissue, and lower respiratory tract infections. Few large, randomized studies comparing its effectiveness with that of other available agents exist; most of these have been published in non-peer-reviewed journal supplements. Intravenous ciprofloxacin is nearly ten times more expensive than the "equivalent" oral dose. Based on the limitations of currently available clinical data, iv ciprofloxacin does not appear to be superior, and is at best comparable in efficacy to other currently available antibiotics. Bacterial resistance, especially in serious infections secondary to P. aeruginosa and S. aureus, is becoming more prevalent. Intravenous ciprofloxacin should be considered an alternative for the treatment of infections of the urinary and lower respiratory tracts only when the following conditions exist: (1) documented bacterial resistance to less-costly regimens with proven efficacy for these indications (e.g., beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole) and known susceptibility to ciprofloxacin, (2) documented hypersensitivity to first-line agents, or (3) inability to ingest or absorb oral ciprofloxacin. Further clinical trials using higher doses are required before iv ciprofloxacin can be recommended routinely for treatment of serious systemic infections. Because of its poor activity against streptococci, marginal activity against some strains of P. aeruginosa, and the rapidly developing resistance of staphylococci, iv ciprofloxacin should not be used empirically for infections in settings (such as the intensive care unit) where these organisms are likely to be pathogenic.





homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 1993 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.