Use of intraperitoneal urokinase for resistant bacterial peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Treatment of resistant peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis with intraperitoneal urokinase: a double-blind clinical trial. Role of intraperitoneal urokinase in acute peritonitis and prevention of catheter loss in peritoneal dialysis patients. [Infection prevention in elective large intestine surgery. Results of a prospective randomized comparative study]. Intraperitoneal (IP) vancomycin therapy for CAPD peritonitis--a prospective, randomized comparison of intermittent v continuous therapy. Intermittent versus continuous intraperitoneal glycopeptide/ceftazidime treatment in children with peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis. The Mid-European Pediatric Peritoneal Dialysis Study Group (MEPPS). A prospective randomized control study of oral nystatin prophylaxis for Candida peritonitis complicating continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. The value of low-dose intraperitoneal immunoglobulin administration in the treatment of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis. A randomized prospective comparison of oral levofloxacin plus intraperitoneal (IP) vancomycin and IP netromycin plus IP vancomycin as primary treatment of peritonitis complicating CAPD. Role of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing postoperative peritonitis in newly placed peritoneal dialysis catheters. A randomized prospective trial of three different regimens of treatment of peritonitis in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. A randomized prospective comparison of oral versus intraperitoneal ciprofloxacin as the primary treatment of peritonitis complicating continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Tenckhoff catheter replacement or intraperitoneal urokinase: a randomised trial in the management of recurrent continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) peritonitis. Intravenous or intraperitoneal vancomycin for the treatment of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis associated gram-positive peritonitis? Management of intra-abdominal infections. The case for intraoperative cultures and comprehensive broad-spectrum antibiotic coverage. The Canadian Intra-abdominal Infection Study Group. Prophylactic antibiotics in the insertion of Tenckhoff catheters. A prospective, randomized trial of two antibiotic regimens in the treatment of peritonitis in CAPD patients: teicoplanin plus tobramycin versus cephalothin plus tobramycin. Comparison of vancomycin versus cefazolin as initial therapy for peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. Cefazolin plus ceftazidime versus imipenem/cilastatin monotherapy for treatment of CAPD peritonitis--a randomized controlled trial. A placebo-controlled study of intravesical pentosanpolysulphate for the treatment of interstitial cystitis. A prospective randomized comparison of single versus multidose gentamicin in the treatment of CAPD peritonitis. Is initial (24 hours) lavage necessary in treatment of CAPD peritonitis? One-dose cefuroxime i.v. and i.p. reduces microbial growth in PD patients after catheter insertion. Prospective, randomised study on antibiotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery. Is it really necessary to use oral antibiotics? Treatment of acute bacterial peritonitis: a trial of imipenem/cilastatin against ampicillin-metronidazole-gentamicin. Cefazolin and netilmycin versus vancomycin and ceftazidime in the treatment of CAPD peritonitis. Failure of topically applied antibiotics, added to systemic prophylaxis, to reduce perineal wound infection in abdominoperineal excision of the rectum. Comparison between oral and systemic antibiotics and their combined use for the prevention of complications in colorectal surgery. A clinical comparison of cefepime and metronidazole versus gentamicin and clindamycin in the antibiotic management of surgically treated advanced appendicitis. The need for antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study. Intraperitoneal teicoplanin in the treatment of peritonitis associated with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.
Intraperitoneal (IP) urokinase is a fibrinolytic agent that has been used in the adjunctive treatment of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and resistant and relapsing peritonitis. However, its efficacy and role in treating resistant CAPD bacterial peritonitis remain unclear and results from previous prospective studies have been conflicting. We prospectively randomized 88 CAPD patients with bacterial peritonitis resistant to initial empirical IP antibiotics into two groups: IP urokinase 60,000 IU and a placebo group. Patients were treated concomitantly with susceptible antibiotics according to culture results. Peritoneal dialysate grew pseudomonas aeruginosa in 13 patients (14.8%), non-pseudomonas bacteria in 63 patients (71.6%) and negative cultures in 12 patients (13.6%). For the clinical outcomes, there were no significant differences in the primary response rates (61.4 vs. 50%), relapse rates (9.1 vs. 13.6%), Tenckhoff catheter removal rates (22.7 vs. 29.5%) and mortality rates (6.8 and 6.8%) between the urokinase group and the controls (p=ns). Subgroup analysis of culture negative patients (n=12) also demonstrated no sgnificant benefit for urokinase treatment. No significant adverse effects were encountered with the IP urokinase instillation. Total median peritonitis-related length of hospitalization for the urokinase group and controls were 7 and 11 days, respectively (p=0.32). We concluded that IP urokinse plays no significant role as an adjuvant therapy in the treatment of bacterial CAPD peritonitis resistant to initial IP antibiotic therapy. Resistant peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is an indication for catheter removal, followed by interim haemodialysis and subsequent catheter replacement. This involves two surgical procedures using general anaesthetic and the availability of adequate hospital haemodialysis facilities. Urokinase is an alternative therapy but evidence of its effect is anecdotal and it has not been studied in a double-blind manner. Patients with resistant peritonitis (either no resolution of peritonitis within 4 days of appropriate antibiotic therapy or a third episode of peritonitis within 6 months) were randomized to receive intraperitoneal urokinase or placebo (saline) followed by 14 days of antibiotics in this double-blind prospective study. Treatment success was resolution of peritonitis within 4 days of giving urokinase/placebo (persistent infection) and no recurrence with the same organism for 6 months (recurrent infection). Twelve patients received urokinase and 12 placebo. Treatment was successful in 8/12 in the urokinase group and 1/12 in the placebo group (Fisher's exact test; P = 0.0047). Urokinase was successful in 8/12 patients with resistant peritonitis and significantly better than placebo. Urokinase is an effective and simple treatment that may avoid the need for catheter removal and interim haemodialysis in patients with resistant CAPD peritonitis. Some studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal (i.p.) urokinase in the resolution of recurrent or relapsing peritonitis, while others have not. Most studies were small, and they varied in methodology. Furthermore, the role of i.p. urokinase in shortening the duration of peritonitis or in preventing recurrence after initial peritonitis has not been examined. In addition, no previous studies have examined the role of i.p. urokinase in preventing, after first infection, catheter loss due to unresolving (resistant) peritonitis. Over a period of 3 years, we prospectively randomized into two groups all peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients who developed a first episode of peritonitis. Group I (n = 40) received i.p. urokinase on the first day of diagnosis (5000 IU intraluminally in the peritoneal catheter and left for 4 hours before next exchange). Group II (n = 40) received no urokinase. The duration of peritonitis was assessed by daily PD fluid white blood cell (WBC) count. Indications for catheter removal were: persistent peritonitis after four days from initiation of antibiotic therapy, or peritonitis with multiple organisms, suggesting bowel perforation. No statistically significant difference was seen between the two groups in regard to primary cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), age, sex, race, weight, type of dialysis [continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), automated peritoneal dialysis (APD), continuous cycling peritoneal dialysis (CCPD)], or duration of dialysis prior to first peritonitis. No statistically significant difference was seen between the two groups in the duration of peritonitis or in the severity of symptoms and signs of peritonitis. Neither was any difference seen in the peritonitis recurrence or relapse rate (10% in the urokinase group vs 7.5% in the control group). Nine patients lost their catheters (3 in the urokinase group: 1 Pseudomonas aeruginosa and 2 Candida tropicalis; 6 in the control group: 1 Klebsiella pneumonia, 1 enterococcus, 2 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and 2 Candida tropicalis). The difference in the rate of catheter loss between the two groups was not statistically significant; it appeared to relate to the type of organism rather than to the response to urokinase. In conclusion, i.p. urokinase plays no significant role in shortening the course of peritonitis or in preventing recurrence or loss of the PD catheter. Loss of PD catheters in patients having their first peritonitis appears to be related primarily to the type of organism causing the infection. In a prospective randomized trial clinical results of orthograde bowel lavage alone (group I) versus combined bowel lavage and parenteral antibiotic prophylaxis with 4 gm Cefoxitin (group II) in two separate dosages (perioperative short-term-prophylaxis) are compared with regard to the reduction of septic complications after colorectal surgery. Septic wound complications were 11/27 = 41% in group I and 2/30 = 7% in group II. The rate of anastomotic leakages was significantly different in the two groups (5/27 in group I, 0 in group II). The monetary costs for given antibiotics and the duration of hospitalization were less in group II. Orthograde bowel lavage alone proved to be of no effect in reducing the rate of septic complications when used without antibiotic perioperative short-term-prophylaxis and therefore cannot be recommended to be used solely. The use of intraperitoneal (IP) vancomycin as initial, single agent therapy for gram positive and "no organism" continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) peritonitis is described, comparing continuous and intermittent administration schedules. "Continuous" therapy consisted of an IP 1-g loading dose of vancomycin followed by 30 mg/L dialysate effluent. "Intermittent" therapy consisted of 2 IP doses of 30 mg vancomycin/kg body weight--the initial dose delivered at diagnosis and the second dose 1 week later. All patients presenting with peritonitis (n = 90) were randomized to receive either continuous or intermittent vancomycin therapy. Patients in whom gram negative organisms and fungi were identified by microscopy and culture were transferred to therapy with a more appropriate antibiotic (n = 39). In the remainder (n = 51), CAPD peritonitis was treated solely with vancomycin (continuous, n = 21; intermittent, n = 30). Clinical resolution was seen in all patients, requiring a mean of 3.2 days for macroscopic clearing of dialysate effluent. Recurrence of peritonitis within 1 month of cessation of therapy was unusual and did not vary between treatment protocols (4/21 v 3/30; P = NS). There were no differences in observed side effects. Thus, IP vancomycin proved to be a useful single agent therapy for gram positive and no organism CAPD peritonitis. Therapy with two IP doses was effective and as safe as continuous IP vancomycin therapy, and therefore should replace other vancomycin administration schedules in the treatment of CAPD peritonitis. Intermittent intraperitoneal antibiotic administration appears as a practical and economical therapeutic concept in continuous peritoneal dialysis (CPD)-related peritonitis, but the equivalence of this principle with standard continuous treatment awaits confirmation by prospective, randomized clinical trials. This study evaluates the efficacy, safety, and clinical acceptance of an initial combination treatment including a glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin) and ceftazidime, each applied either intermittently or continuously, in a cohort of pediatric patients with CPD-related peritonitis. Patients randomized for continuous treatment received an intraperitoneal loading dose of glycopeptide and ceftazidime followed by maintenance doses added to each dialysate bag. In the intermittent treatment groups, the glycopeptide was administered in two loading doses 7 d apart, and ceftazidime during one dialysis cycle per day. Initial treatment response was evaluated after 60 h by the change in a Disease Severity Score and by the clinical decision to continue initial treatment. Of 152 patients observed for a total of 234 patient years, 90 patients developed 195 episodes of peritonitis (including 27 relapses within 4 wk after end of treatment). Dialysate cultures were positive in 83% of the episodes. In gram-positive peritonitis (79% of culture-positive cases), the primary success (overall 95%) and relapse rates (21%) were not different between continuous and intermittent, or between vancomycin and teicoplanin treatment. Oversensitivity reactions occurred in three and ototoxicity in one vancomycin-treated patient, whereas no such side effects were observed with teicoplanin. Residual renal function declined during peritonitis episodes regardless of treatment modality. In gram-negative peritonitis (18% of cases), intermittent ceftazidime treatment was less successful than continuous treatment according to clinical judgment (3 of 11 versus 10 of 14, P < 0.05), but not when rated by Disease Severity Score (8 of 11 versus 12 of 14). In conclusion, intermittent and continuous intraperitoneal treatment of CPD-related peritonitis with glycopeptides and ceftazidime is equally efficacious and safe when measured by objective clinical criteria. This contrasts with a strong tendency of clinicians to move from intermittent to continuous treatment in severe peritonitis. A prospective randomized study of the prevention of candida peritonitis (CP) in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients using oral nystatin given concomitantly with antibiotic therapy was carried out for 2 years. Patients were randomized into two groups. Nystatin tablets 500,000 units four times a day were given to group 1 but not group 2 patients whenever antibiotics were prescribed. There were 199 patients at risk (mean follow-up, 18.0 months) in group 1 and 198 patients at risk (mean follow-up, 16.6 months) in group 2. The peritonitis and antibiotic prescription rates were comparable between the two groups. There were four episodes of CP in four patients in group 1 and 12 episodes in 11 patients in group 2. The probability of CP-free survival at 2 years was higher in group 1 compared with group 2 (0.974 v 0.915; P < 0.05). However, only three (75%) CP episodes in group 1 and six (50%) in group 2 were considered "antibiotics related." The incidence of antibiotics-related CP was 1.39 and 3.19 per 100 peritonitis episodes and 0.66 and 1.43 per 100 antibiotic prescriptions in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = NS). We conclude that oral nystatin prophylaxis with each antibiotic prescription reduced the rate of CP in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis irrespective of its apparent temporal relationship to antibiotic prescription. Peritonitis is a major complication of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). The value of immunomodulatory therapeutic approaches and, especially, methods aimed at augmenting opsonization in the treatment of peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis is unclear. In this study, the effect of intraperitoneal (IP) immunoglobulin (Ig) usage, as an approach for strengthening opsonization, was evaluated in CAPD peritonitis.
                The study included 24 patients with CAPD peritonitis. The patients were divided into two groups, A and B, each consisting of 12 patients. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, gender, CAPD duration, and peritonitis rate. Empiric antibiotic treatment was a 2-week IP ampicillin+sulbactam/netilmycin combination. Group B was additionally given low-dose IP IgG (2 mL = 320 mg) with every exchange. The dialysate leucocyte counts were obtained in both groups until the number was <100 cells/microL to monitor the response to peritonitis treatment.
                In group A, the number of exchanges done until the dialysate leucocyte counts decreased to <100/mL was 13.9 +/- 1.4 and for group B 6.6 +/- 0.4 (p<0.001). The reduction in neutrophils was significantly faster in group B compared to group A (p<0.001). The number of exchanges until abdominal pain completely disappeared was 12.5 +/- 1.7 in group A and 5.6 +/- 0.7 in group B (p<0.001).
                The results of this study show that low-dose, continuous IP IgG administration in the treatment of PD-related peritonitis is safe and effective in shortening the treatment time. To compare the therapeutic efficacy of daily oral levofloxacin plus intermittent intraperitoneal (IP) vancomycin (group 1) versus daily IP netromycin and intermittent IP vancomycin (group 2) in the primary treatment of peritonitis complicating continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD).
                A randomized multicenter prospective open-label comparative clinical study.
                University and Hospital Authority hospitals in Hong Kong.
                All CAPD patients who developed bacterial or culture-negative peritonitis beyond 28 days of a previous episode and without evidence of septicemia, associated tunnel infection, or known sensitivity to trial medications were accepted into the clinical trial.
                A total of 101 patients entered the trial. The primary cure rate was 74.5% for group 1 and 73.6% for group 2. Baseline culture results appeared to influence the clinical outcome: the primary cure rate for culture-negative, gram-positive, and gram-negative episodes was 83.3%, 78.6%, and 42.9% for group 1 and 69.1%, 76.9%, and 71.3% for group 2, respectively. The primary cure rate also varied considerably among individual centers and was particularly noticeable in group 1. In the latter group, it correlated closely with in vitro levofloxacin resistance which in turn correlated closely with previous exposure to fluoroquinolones.
                Oral levofloxacin in combination with intermittent IP vancomycin has comparable efficacy to IP netromycin combined with intermittent IP vancomycin as primary treatment in CAPD peritonitis, but is simpler and more cost-effective to administer. It may be recommended as primary therapy in centers with relatively low exposure and, therefore, low background resistance to fluoroquinolones. The role of vancomycin and other antibiotics in the treatment of acute peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients is well established. However, the role of preoperative vancomycin or cephalosporins in preventing early infection in newly placed PD catheters remains controversial. We performed a prospective randomized study to examine the role of vancomycin or cefazolin prophylaxis in decreasing the incidence of postoperative peritonitis. Over a 6-year period, 221 patients undergoing 254 permanent peritoneal catheter placement procedures were randomized into three groups. Group I patients (86 procedures) were administered a single intravenous (IV) dose of vancomycin, 1,000 mg, 12 hours before peritoneal catheter placement procedures, whereas group II patients (85 procedures) were administered a single IV dose of cefazolin, 1,000 mg, 3 hours before the procedure. Group III patients (83 procedures) were not administered antibiotics preoperatively for at least 1 week before the procedure. Patients were monitored for peritonitis in the following 14 days. Peritonitis developed in 1 patient (1%) in group I (vancomycin group) and 6 patients (7%) in group II (cefazolin group) compared with 10 patients (12%) in group III (control group); P = 0.02. We conclude that the use of preoperative single-dose IV vancomycin prophylaxis for permanent PD catheter placement reduces the risk for postoperative peritonitis. Single-dose vancomycin is superior to single-dose cefazolin in reducing the risk for postoperative peritonitis. Absence of prophylaxis is associated with a high risk for developing postoperative peritonitis. A randomized prospective study was undertaken in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) to evaluate the efficacy of three different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of peritonitis. There were 39 episodes in each treatment group. Patients were treated with intraperitoneal (IP) cephalothin (250 mg/L) and tobramycin (8 mg/L) in group 1, oral ofloxacin (400 mg loading followed by 300 mg daily) in group 2, and a combination of ofloxacin (400 mg followed by 300 mg daily) and rifampicin (300 mg daily). Treatment duration was 10 days. The average culture-positive rate was 75%. The overall cure rate was 80.6% with IP antibiotics, 78.4% with oral ofloxacin, and 81.1% with ofloxacin and rifampicin. After the exclusion of tunnel infections and episodes of peritonitis due to Pseudomonas and resistant organisms, the corresponding figures were 100%, 90.6%, and 93.7%, respectively. Side effects were minimal with IP treatment and with oral ofloxacin, but severe nausea and vomiting occurred in some cases with the combination of ofloxacin and rifampicin. It was concluded that oral ofloxacin is an acceptable first-line therapy for peritonitis in CAPD patients. The present study compared oral versus intraperitoneal (ip) ciprofloxacin (ciproxin) as primary treatment of bacterial peritonitis in patients receiving continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in a randomized, prospective trial. A total of 54 episodes in 46 patients were recruited for study. After excluding nonbacterial episodes and those not treated according to protocol, 48 episodes evenly divided between the two treatment arms were eligible for analysis. The primary cure rate was 41.7% and 66.7%, respectively, in the oral and ip treatment group. Half of those who failed or relapsed were due to infection with resistant, mostly gram-positive bacteria, which accounted for 79% of culture-positive episodes. Of the gram-positive isolates 42.3% were either resistant or intermediately susceptible to ciproxin compared to 16.7% of gram-negative isolates. The high level of bacterial resistance to ciproxin and treatment failure rate were related to the previous exposure to fluoroquinolones. Inadequate trough peritoneal drug levels also accounted for the failures in the ip but not the oral treatment group. We conclude that oral ciproxin is ineffective as a primary treatment of CAPD peritonitis in patients previously exposed to fluoroquinolones and that when administered ip, a dose of 50 mg/L instead of 25 mg/L of ciproxin should be used as maintenance in order to achieve adequate trough peritoneal drug levels. A randomised trial, comparing Tenckhoff catheter replacement as a one-stage procedure and i.p. urokinase, was undertaken in the management of recurrent continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) peritonitis. In addition to appropriate i.p. antibiotic treatment, 17 patients received i.p. urokinase (5000 i.u.) on the second and fourth days of antibiotic treatment, and 14 patients underwent CAPD catheter replacement. An additional six patients also underwent catheter replacement following the recurrence of peritonitis after urokinase treatment. The subsequent recurrence rate of peritonitis following CAPD catheter replacement (5%) was significantly less than after urokinase (41%) (p less than 0.001). Fourteen patients remained free of peritonitis for at least three months after catheter replacement, and five patients were peritonitis-free following urokinase for this period. A clinical and pharmacokinetic study was carried out to determine whether an intraperitoneal (IP) loading dose of vancomycin was as effective as an intravenous (IV) load in the treatment of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD)-associated gram-positive peritonitis. Each patient continued a 14-day treatment on IP maintenance doses. All cases of peritonitis (10 in each group) were eradicated. Side effects occurred in 3 patients following IV vancomycin and in none following IP vancomycin. Serum and peritoneal vancomycin concentrations equilibrated fully and rapidly with each route. It is concluded that an IP loading dose of vancomycin, followed by IP maintenance doses, is as effective as and produces fewer side effects than an IV loading dose in the treatment of CAPD peritonitis. To test the hypothesis that comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy is superior to limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy in intra-abdominal infections.
                Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study.
                University-affiliated hospitals in Canada.
                Two hundred thirteen patients with intra-abdominal infections and planned operative or percutaneous drainage.
                Limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy consisted of cefoxitin sodium, 2 g, intravenously, every 6 hours (n = 109). Comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy consisted of a combination of imipenem and cilastatin sodium, 500 mg, intravenously, every 6 hours (n = 104).
                Failure to cure the intra-abdominal infection (persistence of infection or death).
                Of initial isolates, 98% were sensitive to imipenem plus cilastin sodium compared with 72% for cefoxitin. No difference was found in the failure rate between treatment groups. Among various reasons for failure (including technical), 12 of 80 patients in the limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group had resistant organisms at a second intervention compared with 1 of 74 in the comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group (P < .003, chi 2). One death in the limited-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group was due to autopsy-proved disseminated Pseudomonas aeruginosa (blood, peritoneum, lung, and pleural fluid) that was resistant to cefoxitin, and the other was associated with peritonitis due to cefoxitin-resistant Enterobacter cloacae. One death in the comprehensive broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobial therapy group was associated with peritonitis from Clostridium perfringens that was sensitive to imipenem plus cilastin sodium, and the other was associated with peritonitis from Pseudomonas aeruginosa that was resistant to imipenem plus cilastin sodium.
                Treatment failure of intra-abdominal infection may be due, in part, to the presence of resistant pathogens at the site of infection. Therefore, routine culture of these sites seems worthwhile and empirical therapy should be as comprehensive as possible and should cover all potential pathogens. We assessed the efficacy of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in a prospective trial for patients undergoing insertion of Tenckhoff catheters for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). The prophylactic regimen was a single dose of cefazolin (500 mg) and gentamicin (80 mg) given intravenously half an hour before surgery. There was no significant difference in the number of exit site infections (8 in the antibiotic group vs. 8 in the controls) and the number of episodes of peritonitis (5 in the antibiotic group vs. 2 in the controls). Our study showed that prophylactic preoperative antibiotics did not reduce the number of exit site infections and peritonitis after the insertion of Tenckhoff catheters. A multicentre, comparative, randomized study was performed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of two antibiotic regimens in the treatment of peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients: teicoplanin plus tobramycin versus cephalothin plus tobramycin. After informed consent had been obtained, 68 patients were randomized prospectively to receive either teicoplanin plus tobramycin or cephalothin plus tobramycin. Patients were followed throughout the study and for up to 4 weeks after the end of treatment, when clinical and microbiological parameters were assessed again. The incidence of clinical failure was 4.6 times higher in the cephalothin plus tobramycin group than in the teicoplanin plus tobramycin group (7/28 versus 2/37; P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in bacterial eradication between the two groups. Local and systemic tolerability were good for both regimens. The study shows that teicoplanin plus tobramycin is more effective than cephalothin plus tobramycin and might become a 'first-line' treatment for peritonitis in CAPD patients. The incidence of peritonitis ranges from 1 episode every 24 patient treatment months to 1 episode every 60 patient treatment months [Keane WF, et al. ISPD Guidelines/Recommendations. Adult peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis treatment recommendations: 2000 update. Perit Dial Int 2000; 20:396-411.]. Gram-positive organisms account for over 80% of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis. Recent fear of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) has prompted suggestions of limiting vancomycin use. Fifty-one episodes of peritonitis in 30 patients studied over 2 years were evaluated. Cloudiness of the PD fluid and/or abdominal pain were considered suggestive of peritonitis and were confirmed by cell count and culture. Baseline cell count, Gram stain, and cultures were obtained, with periodic follow-up. Patients were randomized to receive either vancomycin 1 g/L intraperitoneally (IP) as loading dose, repeated on day 5 or day 8, depending on residual renal function, for 2 weeks, or cefazolin 1 g in the first PD bag and continued with 125 mg/L every exchange for 2 or 3 weeks, depending on culture results. All patients also received gentamicin 40 mg IP every day until the culture results were available. A similar randomized trial comparing vancomycin and cefazolin in the past used a lower concentration of cefazolin 50 mg/L [Flanigan MJ, Lim VS. Initial treatment of dialysis associated peritonitis: a controlled trial of vancomycin versus cefazolin. Perit Dial /nt 1991; 11:31-7.]. Peritoneal dialysate fluid cultures revealed 31(60.7%) gram-positive organisms, 7(13.7%) gram-negative organisms, and 2 (3.9%) cultured yeast; 11 (21.5%) cultures yielded no growth. The incidence of peritonitis at our center was 1 episode every 42 patient treatment months. No case of VRE was noted. There was no statistical difference in clinical response or relapse rate for the two protocols. It was the authors' and nurses' observation that patient compliance and satisfaction was better with vancomycin, and the cost per treatment was 23% less than cefazolin. Based on these data we believe vancomycin should still be considered for first-line treatment of PD-associated peritonitis. Peritonitis is a serious complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). We studied the efficacy of imipenem/cilastatin monotherapy in the treatment of PD-related peritonitis.
                We performed an open-label, randomized control study comparing imipenem/cilastatin monotherapy (treatment group) versus cefazolin plus ceftazidime (control group) in the treatment of PD peritonitis. The result was further compared to a historic group treated with cefazolin plus netilmycin. Outcome measures were primary response rate at day 10 and complete cure rate.
                We enrolled 51 patients in the treatment group, 51 in the control group, and identified 96 in the historic group. The primary response rate to the assigned antibiotics was 49.0%, 51.0%, and 49.0% for the treatment, control, and historic groups, respectively (p = 0.97). The primary response rate allowing for change in antibiotic was 82.4%, 90.2%, and 82.3%, respectively, for the three groups (p = 0.41). The complete cure rate was 72.5%, 80.4%, and 82.3%, respectively (p = 0.60). Tenckhoff catheter removal was needed in 6 cases in the treatment group, 6 cases in the control group, and 13 cases in the historic group (p = 0.90).
                We concluded that monotherapy of imipenem/cilastatin has similar efficacy compared to the two standard regimens of cefazolin plus ceftazidime or netilmycin in the treatment of PD peritonitis. To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of intravesical pentosanpolysulphate (PPS) compared with placebo in patients with interstitial cystitis (IC).
                Twenty patients who fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for IC participated in a double-blind placebo-controlled study; 10 received intravesical PPS (300 mg in 50 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride) applied twice a week for 3 months and the other 10 received a placebo. Symptomatic relief and objective variables (bladder capacity voiding volumes and urinary frequency) were assessed after 3 months and the long-term outcome of those continuing treatment was determined.
                Of the patients treated with PPS, four gained significant symptomatic relief compared with only two receiving placebo. Only the urodynamic bladder capacity showed a statistically significant increase in patients treated with PPS (P = 0.047). At 18 months from the start of the study, the symptoms were relieved in eight patients while still receiving PPS instillations and in four without treatment.
                These results suggest that intravesical PPS is an effective option for the treatment of IC and shows that the intravesical application of PPS is a safe treatment with no important side-effects. There is an increasing trend towards the use of aminoglycosides in a once-daily dose administration for the treatment of severe infections in nonrenal failure patients. The use of once-daily dose aminoglycoside therapy may be associated with a reduction in toxicity. We performed a prospective randomized study comparing once-daily versus multiple-dose gentamicin in the treatment of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) peritonitis. Seventy-three patients with 100 new episodes of peritonitis were enrolled in the study. At presentation of peritonitis, the patients were alternately assigned to receive either intraperitoneal gentamicin at a dose of 40 mg/2 L dialysate administered as a once-daily dose or gentamicin at a dose of 10mg/2 L dialysate administered 4 times per day. All patients also received intraperitoneal vancomycin at a dose of 1 g per week. There were no significant differences in the treatment success (88% vs 82%, p = NS) and relapse (18% vs 20%, p = NS) rates between the once-daily dose and multiple-dose groups. The mean trough serum gentamicin level was higher in the once-daily dose group compared to the multiple-dose group (0.75 +/- 0.72 vs 1.50 +/- 1.40 mg/L). In conclusion, gentamicin administered in a once-daily dose is as effective as multiple-dose administration in the treatment of CAPD peritonitis. The lower gentamicin level with once-daily dose administration may be associated with a reduction in aminoglycoside toxicity. A randomized trial was conducted to examine the influence of initial lavage on treatment of CAPD peritonitis. Patients with hypotension and shock were excluded from the trial. Thirty-six CAPD patients with acute peritonitis were randomized to treatment with intraperitoneal antibiotics including either initial 24 hours lavage before resumption of routine CAPD schedule (prior standard approach) or continued prolonged exchanges as in routine CAPD schedule. Median time to solved infection (normalization of white cell count in dialysis effluent) was identical (3 days) in the two groups. Treatment success rate was found to be 72% in the group with initial lavage and 89% in the group with prolonged exchanges. The difference in treatment success (17%) in favour of continued CAPD schedule was not found significant (95% confidence limits--1% to 35%). The results suggest lavage to be of no clinical benefit in treatment of CAPD peritonitis in patients without profound hypotension and shock. When a peritoneal dialysis catheter is inserted intra-abdominally in a patient starting peritoneal dialysis (PD) there is always a risk for postoperative wound infection and peritonitis. At our centre, PD is started immediately after the dialysis catheter is inserted. This may increase the postoperative risk for peritonitis and wound infection. The aim of this prospective, randomized, study was to evaluate whether the incidence of microbial growth postoperatively (within 10 days) after catheter insertion could be reduced by prophylactic antibiotic therapy.
                During a period of 27 months, 38 patients, who consecutively entered the PD programme, (11 women and 27 men, mean age 57 years) were included in the study. Eighteen patients were given cefuroxime 1.5 g i.v. preoperatively and 250 mg i.p. in the first dialysis bag (containing 1 litre fluid) as prophylaxis. Twenty patients were not given prophylactic antibiotics (control group). All catheter insertions were performed in an operating theatre by the same surgeons using the same technique.
                In the test group, none of the patients showed microbial growth in the dialysis fluid during the post-operative period, while in the control group six of 20 patients (30%) suffered from such growth (P = 0.021).
                Prophylactic treatment by cefuroxime i.v. pre- and i.p. perioperatively may reduce the risk for microbial growth and peritonitis after insertion of a Tenckhoff catheter. The use of prophylactic antibiotics in addition to mechanical cleansing is the current standard of care prior to colonic surgery. The question of whether the antibiotics should be administered intravenously or orally, or by both routes, remains controversial. Our aim was to compare three methods of prophylactic antibiotic administration in elective colorectal surgery.
                Three hundred consecutive elective colorectal resections were studied. All patients had preoperative mechanical colon cleansing with oral sodium phosphate and intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis with cefoxitin (one dose before skin incision and two postoperative doses). Patients were randomised to one of the following three groups: group A: three doses of oral antibiotic (neomycin and metronidazole) at the time of mechanical colon cleansing; group B: one dose of oral antibiotic; group C: no oral antibiotics. All patients were followed during their hospital stay and at 7, 14 and 30 days post-surgery.
                Vomiting occurred in 31%, 11% and 9% of the studied patients (groups A, B and C, respectively) (p<0.001). Nausea was present in 44%, 18% and 13% of patients (p<0.001). Abdominal pain was recorded in 13%, 10% and 4% of patients (p: 0.077). Wound infection was present in 7%, 8% and 6% and suture dehiscence occurred in 2%, 2% and 3% of the patients in the three groups (no differences among them). Neither were differences found among the three groups in terms of urinary infections, pneumonia, postoperative ileus or intra-abdominal abscess.
                The addition of three doses of oral antibiotics to intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis is associated with lower patient tolerance in terms of increased nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain, and has shown no advantages in the prevention of postoperative septic complications. Therefore, we recommend that oral antibiotics should not be used prior to colorectal surgery. Imipenem/cilastatin at a dose of 0.5 g six hourly was compared to conventional combination therapy with ampicillin 0.5 g six hourly, metronidazole 0.5 g eight hourly and gentamicin 80 mg eight hourly (with dose adjustment by trough and peak serum levels) in the treatment of severe intra-abdominal infections. All antibiotics were given intravenously. Forty-five patients entered the trial. Of the 19 evaluable patients in the imipenem/cilastatin group, 16 were clinically cured with five microbiological successes and two failures. Of 24 evaluable patients in the combination group, 22 were clinically cured with one microbiological success and one failure. One patient in each group suffered an adverse effect. Patients in the I/C group tended to be older with more women and more severe infections. The origin of peritonitis was similar. I/C did not differ from combination therapy in efficacy or safety and was comparable in cost. However, I/C was easier to administer than combination therapy and there was no need for serum concentration monitoring. In spite of several recommendations, choosing the initial antibiotic to treat continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) peritonitis remains difficult. In our prospective randomized study we attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of less toxic combinations of cephalosporins with vancomycin or netilmycin. From November 1993 to September 1996 we treated 52 episodes of peritonitis in 34 patients. Peritonitis was diagnosed according to the valid criteria. Patients were treated for 14 - 28 days with a combination of either cefazolin plus netilmycin or vancomycin plus ceftazidime. The most frequent bacteria causing peritonitis in the two groups were comparable. The efficacy of the cefazolin/netilmycin combination was 91.6% (22/24) without yeasts and 84.0% (21/25) in the vancomycin/ceftazidime combination. There were no statistically significant differences between the two otherwise efficient combinations of antibiotics. No side effects were observed. We believe that the frequent use of vancomycin could be avoided thus reducing the risks of resistance and ototoxicity. In a prospective, randomized trial, prophylactic use of topical antibiotics in addition to systemic prophylaxis was studied in patients undergoing abdominoperineal amputation of the rectum. All patients received gentamicin 80 mg and metronidazole 500 mg intravenously at induction of anesthesia, followed by the same dose 8 hourly for 48 hours. In accordance with the randomization, half of the patients were additionally given gentamicin 160 mg + metronidazole 400 mg topically into the perineal wound at closure. Perineal wound infection appeared in 19 of the 41 patients who received both systemic and topical prophylaxis, and in 18 of the 38 with only systemic antibiotics. Cell-mediated immunity was preoperatively assessed with a skin test (Multitest) in all but three patients. Impairment of cell-mediated immunity was associated with significantly heightened rate of wound infection, and these patients did not benefit from topical antibiotics. Ninety patients were included in this prospective randomized trial. Each required electric colorectal surgery and was prepared for operation with oral preoperative antibiotic therapy, systemic peroperative therapy, or by a combination of both. The number of each type of septic postoperative complication and their total did not differ between the group treated by oral antibiotics prior to operation and the group treated peroperatively with systemic antibiotic therapy. The total number of septic complications (wall abscesses, fistulas, subdiaphragmatic abscesses, septicemia, peritonitis), however, was significantly less (P less than 0.05) in the group treated by both preoperative oral antibiotics and peroperative systemic antibiotic therapy (3.3 per cent) than in either groups treated only orally preoperatively (30 per cent) or by systemic antibiotic therapy during the operation (23 per cent). The combination of oral antibiotic therapy prior to operation and of systemic peroperative antibiotic therapy, therefore, presents the most effective prophylactic effectiveness. Many antibiotics and antibiotic combinations are used for the treatment of peritonitis because of advanced (gangrenous or perforated) appendicitis. An aminoglycoside combined with an antianaerobe antibiotic is one standard treatment, but there is concern about the potential nephrotoxicity of the aminoglycoside and the necessity for monitoring aminoglycoside blood levels. Cefepime, a new broad-spectrum cephalosporin with a prolonged serum half-life, has excellent activity against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Its spectrum of activity is similar to the aminoglycosides, but it has less potential for inducing renal injury. A double-blind, randomized study compared cefepime, 2 grams every 12 hours IVPB plus metronidazole 0.5 grams every eight hours IVPB (C/M) with gentamicin 1.5 milligrams per kilograms of IVPB plus clindamycin 0.9 grams q eight hours IVPB (G/C), administered up to 14 days, in 96 surgically treated patients with gangrenous or perforated appendicitis. Fifty patients had advanced appendicitis (nine gangrenous and 41 perforated) in the C/M group and 46 patients (six gangrenous and 40 perforated) in the G/C group. The mean number of days of postoperative fever (C/M, 4.4 +/- 2.7 versus G/C, 5.0 +/- 2.2), postoperative hospitalization (C/M, 2.0 +/- 1.9 versus G/C, 2.0 +/- 2.1) and antibiotic therapy (C/M, 6.3 +/- 1.9 versus G/C, 6.9 +/- 1.9) was similar in the two treatment groups. There were 11 treatment failures (C/M, three; G/C, eight; p = 0.13), six of which were probably a result of enterococci. No deaths occurred. Our study results show that the efficacy of cefepime plus metronidazole is equivalent to that of clindamycin plus gentamicin. The need for antibiotic treatment when performing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy may not be as important as it is thought. This study assesses the real efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy with respect to the postoperative infection rate.
                A prospective randomized study on the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                University teaching hospital, La Sapienza, Italy.
                Eighty-four patients randomly placed into 2 groups (A [n = 44] and B [n = 40]) immediately before undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Before anesthesia was administered, group A received intravenously 2 g of cefotaxime sodium diluted in 100 mL of isotonic sodium chloride solution; group B, 10 mL of isotonic sodium chloride solution in 100 mL of saline. A gallbladder bile sample for culture was withdrawn intraoperatively from all patients. In both groups, age, sex, weight, duration of surgery, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists patient classification score, preoperative autologous blood donation, antibiotic administration, intraoperative gallbladder rupture, findings from bile culture positive for bacteria, episodes of colic within 30 days before surgery, length of postoperative hospital stay, and number of septic complications were recorded. All data were correlated by univariate and multivariate analyses with the onset of septic phenomena.
                In group A, 3 cases of wound infection, 1 case of subhepatic abscess from bile leakage, and 1 case of urinary tract infection were observed; group B, 4 cases of wound infection, 1 case of bronchopneumonia, and 2 cases of urinary tract infection. Comparison of data showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. Findings from bile examination in patients with sepsis complications were positive in 5 patients in group A and in 6 in group B (P = .91). Multivariate analysis showed diabetes mellitus and colic episodes within 30 days before surgery as independent factors significantly associated to the onset of infectious complications.
                In elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, antibiotic treatment did not seem to affect the incidence and severity of infections or the degree of bile contamination. The efficacy of teicoplanin in the treatment of peritonitis in patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) was evaluated in a randomised comparison with vancomycin. The dosage regimen used was 50 mg of vancomycin or teicoplanin per 2 1 bag of dialysate for 48 h followed by 25 mg per bag for a further five days. Twelve episodes of peritonitis were studied. There was no significant difference in the bacteriological or clinical cure rates of either antibiotic.
Based on one study, IP administration of antibiotics is superior to IV dosing for treating PD peritonitis. Intermittent and continuous dosing of antibiotics are equally efficacious. There is no role shown for routine peritoneal lavage or use of urokinase. No interventions were found to be associated with significant harm.