Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of cefetamet pivoxil for the treatment of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in Korean patients compared to treatment with cefdinir. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, randomized double-blind, comparative study was conducted by the Departments of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at 17 hospitals or universities in the Republic of Korea from March 2017 to April 2019. A total of 309 patients were screened and 249 patients participated in the study. RESULTS: Treatment with cefetamet pivoxil for 2 weeks showed 82.4% clinical cure and improvement rates in patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis compared to 84.68% in those taking cefdinir for 2 weeks, showing that cefetamet pivoxil administered twice a day for 2 weeks was as effective as cefdinir 3 times a day for 2 weeks for the treatment of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. The overall adverse reaction rates of both drugs were 10.56% in the cefetamet pivoxil group and 15.49% in the cefdinir group, without serious adverse events or drug reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Cefetamet pivoxil twice a day was as efficacious and safe as cefdinir 3 times a day for the treatment of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis, which suggested that cefetamet pivoxil may be a suitable alternative to cefdinir.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: