Cited by 4Surgical site infection preventionMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsUrinary Tract Infections Management

A prospective, randomized, clinical study to compare the clinical safety, effectiveness, and cost of oral ofloxacin/clindamycin vs intravenous clindamycin/gentamicin for the treatment of postpartum endomyometritis

Pietrantoni, Marcello, Goss, Sherree, Gall, Stanley A.·1998·Primary Care Update for OB/GYNS

Abstract

Objective: The primary objective of this prospective, randomized, clinical study was to compare the safety, clinical and microbiologic efficacy, and cost of oral ofloxacin in combination with clindamycin vs intravenous (IV) clindamycin/gentamicin in the early empiric treatment for hospitalized patients with mild to moderate postpartum endomyometritis. The secondary objective is to reduce total hospital and patient treatment cost. Postpartum endomyometritis is a major cause of infectious morbidity in the obstetric patient. It is the most common complication associated with cesarean delivery. Careful timing and amniotomy, limited vaginal examinations, and prophylactic antibiotics for cesarean section delivery may help to reduce the incidence and severity of endomyometritis. Endomyometritis is caused by bacteria that compose the normal cervicovaginal flora. These are anaerobic gram-positive cocci (Peptostreptococcus and Peptococcus), aerobic streptococci (Group B Streptococci and enterococci), Enterobacteriaceae, Bacteroides (B. fragilis, B. bivius, and B. disiens), and clostridium species.Ofloxacin is a synthetic broad-spectrum antibacterial agent for intravenous and oral administration. Following oral administration, the bioavailability in tablet form is 98% with maximum serum concentrations in 1 to 2 hours. Steady state concentrations are achieved after 4 doses. Ofloxacin usually is bactericidal in action. A synthetic broad-spectrum antibacterial agent for intravenous and ora…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1068-607x(98)00023-7

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In one trial (Pietrantoni 1998) of 16 participants, oral ofloxacin plus intravenous clindamycin compared with intravenous clindamycin plus gentamicin had a risk ratio for treatment failure of 0.67 (95% CI 0.15 to 2.98), with 2/8 versus 3/8 events, and the overall effect was not statistically significant (Z=0.53, P=0.6).

    “Pietrantoni 1998 2/8 3/8 100% 0.67[0.15,2.98]Total (95% CI) 8 8 100% 0.67[0.15,2.98]Total events: 2 (Oral ofloxacin+ IV clinda), 3 (IV clinda/gent) Heterogeneity: Not applicable Test for overall effect: Z=0.53(P=0.6)”

    From Antibiotic regimens for postpartum endometritis (2015) · cites this paper as Pietrantoni 1998

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pietrantoni, M., Goss, S., & Gall, S. A.
Affiliations
University of Louisville (US)
Venue
Primary Care Update for OB/GYNS
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-07
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
146-147
ISSN
1068-607X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2012119356
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2015: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Primary Care Update for OB/GYNS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical site infection prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Urinary Tract Infections Management
Keywords
ofloxacin, clindamycin, gentamicin, oral antibiotic therapy, intravenous antibiotics, empirical antibiotic therapy, cesarean section, hospital costs, treatment costs, antibiotic safety, Peptostreptococcus, Streptococcus agalactiae, Bacteroides fragilis, anaerobic bacteria

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review