ABSTRACT
We compared nalidixic acid, 55 mg/kg/day, with ampicillin, 100 mg/kg/day, both given orally for 5 days, in the treatment of children with dysentery caused by shigellosis. All patients entered into the study had illness of less than 72 hours' duration and no prior allopathic drug therapy. Treatment was randomized and administered in double-blind fashion. Patients initially treated with ampicillin who were infected with a Shigella strain resistant to ampicillin were considered as a separate group (ampicillin-R). All isolates were susceptible to nalidixic acid. Similar percentages of patients treated with nalidixic acid (26/32, 81%) and with ampicillin (17/22, 77%) were clinically cured by the end of therapy; the rate in ampicillin-R (3/14, 21%) patients was significantly lower (p less than 0.001). Stool frequency in patients treated with nalidixic acid was significantly less than for ampicillin-treated or ampicillin-R patients during the final 3 study days. All patients treated with nalidixic acid and ampicillin had Shigella eradicated from their stool by day 3, compared with 77% (10/13) of ampicillin-R patients (p less than 0.05, ampicillin-R vs nalidixic acid or ampicillin). We conclude that nalidixic acid is an effective alternative to ampicillin in the treatment of shigellosis caused by nalidixic acid-susceptible strains.
Subject(s)
Dysentery, Bacillary/drug therapy , Nalidixic Acid/therapeutic use , Ampicillin/therapeutic use , Ampicillin Resistance , Child, Preschool , Clinical Trials as Topic , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Random AllocationABSTRACT
We compared the efficacy and safety of a single polyelectrolyte solution, Dhaka solution (DS), containing 133 mmol/L sodium, 13 mmol/L potassium, 98 mmol/L chloride, and 48 mmol/L acetate with and without 139 mmol/L (25 gm/L) dextrose in the rapid (4 hours) rehydration of 67 patients with diarrhea and moderate or severe dehydration requiring parenteral fluid therapy. Of the 67 patient, 31 were randomly assigned to receive the dextrose-containing solution (DS + D) and 36 DS without dextrose. On admission to the hospital, the two groups of patients were similar with respect to enteric pathogens detected, proportion with hyponatremia, magnitude of dehydration as assessed by clinical criteria, serum protein or creatinine concentration, and plasma glucose levels. At the end of the 4-hour infusion, both groups of patients had similar decreases in serum creatinine and protein levels and similar volume of urine output, but patients receiving DS + D had a significantly higher plasma glucose level than patients receiving DS (7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dl) vs 5.39 mmol/L (97 mg/dl), P less than 0.01). One patient in the DS group had hypoglycemia (plasma glucose 2.0 mmol/L (36 mg/dl) at 4 hours. No other complications were noted. Serum protein values 24 hours after admission were little changed from 4-hour values, suggesting that rehydration was complete at the end of 4 hours. We conclude that, in our patients, rehydration can be carried out safely and rapidly with the use of a single solution and that adding 139 mmol/L (25 gm/L) of dextrose to the solution can prevent hypoglycemia without producing an osmotic diuresis.