Topical antibiotics in the treatment of superficial skin infections in general practice--a comparison of mupirocin with sodium fusidate. Topical mupirocin treatment of impetigo is equal to oral erythromycin therapy. Impetigo contagiosa III. Comparative efficacy of oral erythromycin and topical mupirocin. Topical antibiotic treatment of impetigo with mupirocin. Topical 2% mupirocin versus 2% fusidic acid ointment in the treatment of primary and secondary skin infections. Topical mupirocin vs. systemic erythromycin treatment for pyoderma. Comparative study of mupirocin and oral co-trimoxazole plus topical fusidic acid in eradication of nasal carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Topical antibiotic treatment of impetigo with tetracycline. Fusidic acid cream in the treatment of impetigo in general practice: double blind randomised placebo controlled trial.
A total of 413 eligible patients took part in an observer-blind randomised multicentre clinical trial in order to compare the clinical and bacteriological efficacy of mupirocin (Bactroban) ointment with sodium fusidate (Fucidin) ointment for treating superficial skin infections seen in general practice. Mupirocin was applied twice daily and sodium fusidate thrice daily for a period of 7 days. Both treatments were similarly effective with 97% patients treated with mupirocin and 93% patients treated with sodium fusidate responding. Mupirocin was significantly more effective in the treatment of acute primary skin infections and in the treatment of a subgroup of patients with impetigo (P less than 0.01). Of the organisms detected before treatment began, 93% were not found after treatment with mupirocin compared with 89% after treatment with sodium fusidate. Staphylococcus aureus and/or beta-haemolytic streptococci appeared to be eliminated in significantly more patients treated with mupirocin (96%) compared with those treated with sodium fusidate (88%), (P = 0.03). Both treatments were well tolerated. Topical antimicrobial therapy has not been effective in the past against cutaneous bacterial infections. In this study, a new topical antibiotic ointment, mupirocin, was compared with oral erythromycin ethylsuccinate in the treatment of impetigo. Seventy-five patients clinically diagnosed as having impetigo and with positive cultures of Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pyogenes, or both were examined in an investigator-blinded study. Patients used topical mupirocin applied three times daily or the usual oral dose of erythromycin ethylsuccinate (30 to 50 mg/kg per day). Patients' lesions were examined clinically and cultured bacteriologically on days 0, 3, and 8, and 1 week after treatment. Susceptibility testing was performed on pathogens isolated to determine antibiotic resistance. Mupirocin treatment produced similar clinical results to oral erythromycin and was superior in the eradication of S aureus, including antibiotic-resistant S aureus. These results show topical mupirocin to be a safe and effective alternative to oral antibiotic therapy in the treatment of impetigo. Ninety-seven patients with impetigo were prospectively enrolled in a study to determine the comparative efficacy of systemic and topical antibiotic therapy. After obtaining a bacterial culture from a representative lesion, the children were randomized to receive seven days of either oral erythromycin or topical mupirocin administered three times daily. Staphylococcus aureus alone was isolated from 51% and in association with group A beta-hemolytic streptococci (GABS) from 29%; GABS alone was isolated from 4% of patients. Of 48 children who received erythromycin, 43 (90%) were clinically improved or cured, and 11 of 17 were bacteriologically cured. Of 49 children who received mupirocin, 47 (96%) were clinically improved or cured, and 10 of 14 were bacteriologically cured. At three-week follow-up, clinical cure rates and number of secondary household cases of impetigo were equivalent in both treatment groups. Mupirocin appears to be a well-tolerated, albeit expensive, alternative to erythromycin for the treatment of impetigo. Because the effectiveness of topical antimicrobials in the treatment of ecthyma, impetigo, and pyoderma is not well established, the US Food and Drug Administration has recently proposed guidelines for tests of topical antimicrobial efficacy in primary skin infections. The guidelines require both comparison with the agent's base and microbiologic documentation of efficacy. These guidelines were followed in this double-blind, eight-day evaluation of impetigo/ecthyma treated with mupirocin, a new agent that is only active topically. All cultures, before and after therapy, were taken using swabs dipped in neutralizing broth plus 10% fetal bovine serum to minimize antimicrobial "carry over" to the culture plate. Staphylococcus aureus, which was isolated from 94% of the patients before therapy, was eliminated in 88% of the mupirocin-treated patients and 47% of the vehicle-treated patients. Group A beta-hemolytic streptococci were eliminated in 100% of the mupirocin-treated and 0% of the vehicle-treated patients. To our knowledge, this is the first topical antibacterial treatment for primary skin infections proved superior to its vehicle using the proposed US Food and Drug Administration guidelines. The efficacy and side effects of topical mupirocin (Bactroban) and fusidic acid (Fucidin) ointment were compared in a double-blind, randomized trial in 70 patients who came to the Dermatologic Clinic of L'Enfant Jésus Hospital with primary or secondary (or both) skin infections. Thirty-five patients were treated with mupirocin and 35 patients were treated with fusidic acid three times a day for seven days. Clinical and bacteriologic assessments were conducted before and after treatment. The efficacy of mupirocin, in terms of resolution and improvement of clinical signs and symptoms of infection, as well as of the elimination of infecting organisms, was similar to that of fusidic acid. Of 34 patients (1 could not be evaluated) treated with mupirocin, a clinical cure was achieved in 18, and significant improvement was demonstrated in 15. Similarly, of 35 patients treated with fusidic acid, a clinical cure was achieved in 18 and improvement occurred in 15. Bacteriologic cure rates were 97% (30 of 31 patients evaluated) in the mupirocin-treated group, compared with 87% (27 of 31 patients evaluated) in the fusidic acid-treated group. No side effects were observed in either treatment group. Because topical 2% mupirocin has little or no potential for irritation, systemic side effects, or cross-resistance with other antibiotics, its efficacy is likely to make this new compound a useful agent for the treatment of superficial skin infections. 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. Mupirocin is a topically applied drug that is very active in the eradication of nasal carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). However, studies designed to compare mupirocin treatment with other antimicrobial regimens are lacking. We therefore conducted an open, prospective, randomized, controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of mupirocin versus those of oral co-trimoxazole plus topical fusidic acid (both regimens with a clorhexidine scrub bath) for the eradication of MRSA from nasal and extranasal carriers of MRSA. The eradication rates with mupirocin and co-trimoxazole plus fusidic acid at 2, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 90 days were 93 and of 93, 100 and 100, 97 and 94, 100 and 92, 96 and 95, and 78 and 71%, respectively, for nasal carriage. At 7, 14, and 28 days the eradication rates for extranasal carriage by the two regimens were 23 and 74, 83 and 76, and 45 and 69%, respectively. The efficacies and safety of both regimens were similar. The MRSA isolates were not resistant to the study drugs either at the baseline or at follow-up. These results suggest that mupirocin and co-trimoxazole plus fusidic acid, both used in conjunction with a chlorhexidine soap bath, are equally effective and safe for the eradication of MRSA from nasal and extranasal MRSA carriers. Mupirocin was easier to use but was more expensive. Forty-nine children aged 0.2-13 years with bullous and eroded lesions, from which Staphylococcus aureus was isolated, were diagnosed with impetigo and entered into a randomized, open-labeled trial of topical oxytetracycline hydrochloride (tetracycline) compared with a combination of topical tetracycline and oral antibiotics. After one week of topical tetracycline treatment, 22 of the 28 patients were clinically cured, and the remaining six patients had improved. In the other treatment group, 14 patients of 21 were clinically cured and 7 patients improved by the combination of topical tetracycline and oral antibiotics. There were no significant differences between the two groups. Therefore, the present study suggests that topical tetracycline treatment is effective for the treatment of impetigo. To test the hypothesis that fusidic acid would not increase the treatment effect of disinfecting with povidone-iodine alone in children with impetigo.
                Randomised placebo controlled trial.
                General practices in Greater Rotterdam.
                184 children aged 0-12 years with impetigo.
                Clinical cure and bacterial cure after one week.
                After one week of treatment 55% of the patients in the fusidic acid group were clinically cured compared with 13% in the placebo group (odds ratio 12.6, 95% confidence interval 5.0 to 31.5, number needed to treat 2.3). After two weeks and four weeks the differences in cure rates between the two groups had become smaller. More children in the placebo group were non-compliant (12 v 5) and received extra antibiotic treatment (11 v 3), and more children in the placebo group reported adverse effects (19 v 7). Staphylococcus aureus was found in 96% of the positive cultures; no strains were resistant to fusidic acid.
                Fusidic acid is much more effective than placebo (when both are given in combination with povidone-iodine shampoo) in the treatment of impetigo. Because of the low rate of cure and high rate of adverse events in the placebo group, the value of povidone-iodine in impetigo can be questioned.
There is good evidence that topical mupirocin and topical fusidic acid are equally, or more, effective than oral treatment. Due to the lack of studies in people with extensive impetigo, it is unclear if oral antibiotics are superior to topical antibiotics in this group. Fusidic acid and mupirocin are of similar efficacy. Penicillin was not as effective as most other antibiotics. There is a lack of evidence to support disinfection measures to manage impetigo.