Author:
Alp Emine,Koc Rahmi Kemal,Durak Ahmet Candan,Yildiz Orhan,Aygen Bilgehan,Sumerkan Bulent,Doganay Mehmet
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The optimal treatment regimen and duration of the therapy is still controversial in spinal brucellosis. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy, adverse drug reactions, complications and cost of ciprofloxacin plus rifampicin versus doxycycline plus streptomycin in the treatment of spinal brucellosis.
Methods
The patients diagnosed as spinal brucellosis between January 2002 to December 2004 were enrolled into the study. Patients were enrolled into the two antimicrobial therapy groups (doxycycline plus streptomycin vs. ciprofloxacin plus rifampicin) consecutively. For the cost analysis of the two regimens, only the cost of antibiotic therapy was analysed for each patient.
Results
During the study period, 31 patients with spinal brucellosis were enrolled into the two antimicrobial therapy groups. Fifteen patients were included in doxycycline plus streptomycin group and 16 patients were included in ciprofloxacin plus rifampicin group. Forty-two levels of spinal column were involved in 31 patients. The most common affected site was lumbar spine (n = 32, 76%) and involvement level was not different in two groups. Despite the disadvantages (older age, more prevalent operation and abscess formation before the therapy) of the patients in the ciprofloxacin plus rifampicin group, the duration of the therapy (median 12 weeks in both groups) and clinical response were not different from the doxycycline plus streptomycin. The cost of ciprofloxacin plus rifampicin therapy was 1.2 fold higher than the cost of doxycycline plus streptomycin therapy.
Conclusion
Classical regimen (doxycycline plus streptomycin), with the appropriate duration (at least 12 weeks), is still the first line antibiotics and alternative therapies should be considered when adverse drug reactions were observed.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference28 articles.
1. Young EJ: Brucella species. Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. Edited by: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R. 2005, Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone, 2: 2669-2674. 6
2. Solera J, Lozano E, Martinez-Alfaro E, Espinosa A, Castillejos ML, Abad L: Brucellar spondylitis: review of 35 cases and literature survey. Clin Infect Dis. 1999, 29: 1440-1449. 10.1086/313524.
3. Mousa AM, Muhtaseb SA, Almudallal DS, Khodeir SM, Marafie AA: Osteoarticular complications of brucellosis: a study of 169 cases. Rev Infect Dis. 1987, 9: 531-543.
4. Aygen B, Doganay M, Sumerkan B, Yildiz O, Kayabas U: Clinical manifestations, complications and treatment of brucellosis: a retrospective evaluation of 480 patients. Med Mal Infect. 2002, 32: 485-493.
5. Tasova Y, Saltoglu N, Sahin G, Aksu HSZ: Osteoarthicular involvement of brucellosis in Turkey. Clin Rheumatol. 1999, 18: 214-219. 10.1007/s100670050087.
Cited by
49 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献