Topical mupirocin vs. systemic erythromycin treatment for pyoderma.

Abstract

Although topical antibiotics have been considered less than effective agents in the treatment of "impetigo," recent experience suggests that topical therapy has a place as primary treatment of pyoderma and impetigo. This bacteriologically controlled, randomized study compared the safety and efficacy of mupirocin with oral erythromycin in the treatment of pyoderma and impetigo. A total of 29 mupirocin-treated and 30 erythromycin-treated patients completed the study. None of the mupirocin-treated patients reported adverse experiences compared with 4 erythromycin-treated patients who reported 6 adverse experiences. The mupirocin-treated group had a significantly higher benefit:risk ratio than the erythromycin-treated group as measured by the investigator's global evaluation (P = 0.01). Both treatments eradicated 100% of the two most common pathogens, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes. Results from this study demonstrate that mupirocin is as effective as systemic erythromycin ethylsuccinate for treatment of pyoderma and impetigo.

• Authors: S McLinn
• Journal: The Pediatric infectious disease journal (Pediatr Infect Dis J) Vol. 7 Issue 11 Pg. 785-90 (Nov 1988) ISSN: 0891-3668 [Print] United States
• PMID: 3148127 (Publication Type: Clinical Trial, Comparative Study, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial)

Chemical References

• Anti-Bacterial Agents
• Fatty Acids
• Erythromycin
• Mupirocin

Topics

• Administration, Topical
• Anti-Bacterial Agents (administration & dosage, therapeutic use)
• Erythromycin (therapeutic use)
• Evaluation Studies as Topic
• Fatty Acids (administration & dosage, therapeutic use)
• Humans
• Infant
• Mupirocin
• Pyoderma (diagnosis, drug therapy, etiology)