Treatment Of Uncomplicated Typhoid Fever Research Articles

Global trends in typhoid and paratyphoid Fever.

Typhoid and paratyphoid fever continue to be important causes of illness and death, particularly among children and adolescents in south-central and Southeast Asia, where enteric fever is associated with poor sanitation and unsafe food and water. High-quality incidence data from Asia are underpinning efforts to expand access to typhoid vaccines. Efforts are underway to develop vaccines that are immunogenic in infants after a single dose and that can be produced locally in countries of endemicity. The growing importance of Salmonella enterica serotype Paratyphi A in Asia is concerning. Antimicrobial resistance has sequentially emerged to traditional first-line drugs, fluoroquinolones, and third-generation cephalosporins, posing patient treatment challenges. Azithromycin has proven to be an effective alternative for treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever. The availability of full genome sequences for S. enterica serotype Typhi and S. enterica serotype Paratyphi A confirms their place as monomorphic, human-adapted pathogens vulnerable to control measures if international efforts can be redoubled.

A multi-center randomised controlled trial of gatifloxacin versus azithromycin for the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in children and adults in Vietnam.

BackgroundDrug resistant typhoid fever is a major clinical problem globally. Many of the first line antibiotics, including the older generation fluoroquinolones, ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin, are failing.ObjectivesWe performed a randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg/day) versus azithromycin (20 mg/kg/day) as a once daily oral dose for 7 days for the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in children and adults in Vietnam.MethodsAn open-label multi-centre randomised trial with pre-specified per protocol analysis and intention to treat analysis was conducted. The primary outcome was fever clearance time, the secondary outcome was overall treatment failure (clinical or microbiological failure, development of typhoid fever-related complications, relapse or faecal carriage of S. typhi). Principal FindingsWe enrolled 358 children and adults with suspected typhoid fever. There was no death in the study. 287 patients had blood culture confirmed typhoid fever, 145 patients received gatifloxacin and 142 patients received azithromycin. The median FCT was 106 hours in both treatment arms (95% Confidence Interval [CI]; 94–118 hours for gatifloxacin versus 88–112 hours for azithromycin), (logrank test p = 0.984, HR [95% CI] = 1.0 [0.80–1.26]).Overall treatment failure occurred in 13/145 (9%) patients in the gatifloxacin group and 13/140 (9.3%) patients in the azithromycin group, (logrank test p = 0.854, HR [95% CI] = 0.93 [0.43–2.0]). 96% (254/263) of the Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi isolates were resistant to nalidixic acid and 58% (153/263) were multidrug resistant.ConclusionsBoth antibiotics showed an excellent efficacy and safety profile. Both gatifloxacin and azithromycin can be recommended for the treatment of typhoid fever particularly in regions with high rates of multidrug and nalidixic acid resistance. The cost of a 7-day treatment course of gatifloxacin is approximately one third of the cost of azithromycin in Vietnam.Trial RegistrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN67946944

An Open Randomized Comparison of Gatifloxacin versus Cefixime for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Enteric Fever

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of gatifloxacin versus cefixime in the treatment of uncomplicated culture positive enteric fever.DesignA randomized, open-label, active control trial with two parallel arms.SettingEmergency Room and Outpatient Clinics in Patan Hospital, Lagankhel, Lalitpur, Nepal.ParticipantsPatients with clinically diagnosed uncomplicated enteric fever meeting the inclusion criteria.InterventionsPatients were allocated to receive one of two drugs, Gatifloxacin or Cefixime. The dosages used were Gatifloxacin 10 mg/kg, given once daily for 7 days, or Cefixime 20 mg/kg/day given in two divided doses for 7 days.Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcome measure was fever clearance time. The secondary outcome measure was overall treatment failure (acute treatment failure and relapse).ResultsRandomization was carried out in 390 patients before enrollment was suspended on the advice of the independent data safety monitoring board due to significant differences in both primary and secondary outcome measures in the two arms and the attainment of a priori defined endpoints. Median (95% confidence interval) fever clearance times were 92 hours (84–114 hours) for gatifloxacin recipients and 138 hours (105–164 hours) for cefixime-treated patients (Hazard Ratio[95%CI] = 2.171 [1.545–3.051], p<0.0001). 19 out of 70 (27%) patients who completed the 7 day trial had acute clinical failure in the cefixime group as compared to 1 out of 88 patients (1%) in gatifloxacin group(Odds Ratio [95%CI] = 0.031 [0.004 – 0.237], p<0.001). Overall treatment failure patients (relapsed patients plus acute treatment failure patients plus death) numbered 29. They were determined to be (95% confidence interval) 37.6 % (27.14%–50.2%) in the cefixime group and 3.5% (2.2%–11.5%) in the gatifloxacin group (HR[95%CI] = 0.084 [0.025–0.280], p<0.0001). There was one death in the cefixime group.ConclusionsBased on this study, gatifloxacin is a better treatment for uncomplicated enteric fever as compared to cefixime.Trial RegistrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN75784880

A randomized comparison of oral chloramphenicol versus ofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in Laos

We conducted a randomized open trial of oral chloramphenicol (50mg/kg/day in four divided doses for 14 days) versus ofloxacin (15 mg/kg/day in two divided doses for 3 days) in 50 adults with culture-confirmed uncomplicated typhoid fever in Vientiane, Laos. Patients had been ill for a median (range) of 8 (2-30) days. All Salmonella enterica serotype typhi isolates were nalidixic acid-sensitive, four (8%) were chloramphenicol-resistant and three (6%) were multidrug-resistant. Median (range) fever clearance times were 90 (24-224) hours in the chloramphenicol group and 54 (6-93) hours in the ofloxacin group (P<0.001). One patient in the chloramphenicol group developed an ileal perforation. Three days ofloxacin was more effective than 14 days chloramphenicol for the in-patient treatment of typhoid fever, irrespective of antibiotic susceptibility, and was of similar cost.

A comparative study of cefixime and ofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated Typhoid fever in Vietnamese children

A comparative study of cefixime and ofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated Typhoid fever in Vietnamese children

Short Course of Ofloxacin for Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Typhoid

In recent years, multiresistant strains of Salmonella typhi have emerged in many tropical countries. These strains remain highly sensitive to the fluoroquinolone antibiotics, although use of these drugs by children is considered contraindicated because of their reported toxicity in the cartilage of experimental animals. In a paired, open, randomized study during an epidemic of multidrug-resistant typhoid in southern Vietnam, two short-course ofloxacin regimens (15 mg/kg daily for 3 days and 10 mg/kg daily for 5 days) were compared for the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever. Of 438 patients enrolled (of whom 286 were < or = 14 years old), 228 had blood cultures positive for Salmonella species (S. typhi, 207; S. paratyphi A, 19; and S. choleraesuis, 2). There was one treatment failure in a patient who took only one dose of ofloxacin. Otherwise, both regimens were completely effective; there were no proven carriers, and there was no evidence of toxicity, particularly in children. A 3-day course of ofloxacin proved to be safe and highly effective in the treatment of uncomplicated, multidrug-resistant typhoid fever.

Comparison of ofloxacin and ceftriaxone for short-course treatment of enteric fever

An open, randomized comparison of ofloxacin (200 mg, every 12 h) given orally for 5 days and ceftriaxone (3 g, once daily) given intravenously for 3 days in the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever was conducted in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Salmonella paratyphi type A was isolated from six patients. Salmonella typhi was isolated from 41 patients; 63% of these isolates were resistant to multiple antibiotics: ampicillin, chloramphenicol, sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and tetracycline. Of the culture-confirmed cases, treatment with ofloxacin resulted in complete cure of all 22 patients, whereas 18 of 25 patients treated with ceftriaxone were completely cured (P < 0.01). In the ceftriaxone group, there were six acute treatment failures and one relapse. Mean +/- standard deviation fever clearance times were 81 +/- 25 h for ofloxacin and 196 +/- 87 h for ceftriaxone (P < 0.0001). Short-course treatment with oral ofloxacin (5 days) is significantly better than that with ceftriaxone (3 days) and will be of particular benefit in areas where multiresistant strains of S. typhi are encountered.