title: Intraperitoneal ciprofloxacin and rifampicin versus cephradine as initial treatment of (C)APD-related peritonitis: a prospective randomized multicenter comparison (CIPPER trial).
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The initial treatment of peritonitis has evolved from single-agent to combination regimens. The initial response rates improved with these newer regimens but relapsing peritonitis continues to occur. For biofilm-embedded or intracellularly sequestrated bacteria, a combination of intracellularly- and biofilm-active agents such as ciprofloxacin and rifampicin might be beneficial. Many Dutch centers continue to use cephradine as initial treatment, claiming clinically adequate responses with this regimen. We compared the impact of these two regimens on outcome in patients who developed a new episode of peritonitis.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective randomized open trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Multicenter study including 14 Dutch dialysis units.
  
  
  METHODS
  From October 1996 to October 1999, 367 patients from 14 centers were randomized to be treated with ciprofloxacin + rifampicin (CR; each 50 mg/L) or cephradine (C; 250 mg/L) in case of peritonitis. Of these 367 patients, 98 developed peritonitis, 44 of whom were treated with CR and 54 with C.
  
  
  METHODS
  Clinical response, divided into early (during the 2 weeks of therapy) and late (including the following 4 weeks) response. Success was defined as disappearance of all signs and symptoms by days 4-6, through day 42. Bacteriological response was either success (eradication) or failure (persistence, superinfection, or eradication with relapse/reinfection).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The groups were comparable for age, sex, duration of continuous ambulatory/automated peritoneal dialysis, and occurrence of diabetes. Bacteriological cultures in both groups revealed predominantly gram-positive micro-organisms. Initial and late clinical successes were obtained in 27/54 and 20/54 episodes (50% and 37%) in the C group, and 33/44 and 28/44 episodes (75% and 63.6%) in the CR group (p = 0.021 and p = 0.019). Bacteriological success occurred in 29.6% in the C group, and in 59.1% in the CR group (p= 0.026), with failure in 46.3% and 18.2%, respectively. Peritonitis episodes were bacteriologically not evaluable in 24.1% of episodes in the C group and 22.7% of episodes in the CR group, due mostly to no growth in the initial culture.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The CIPPER Trial showed ciprofloxacin + rifampicin to be superior to cephradine as empiric treatment of peritonitis.
authors.affiliation: Department of Nephrology, Free University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. c.w.h.defijter@olvg.nl
authors.forename: C W
authors.initials: CW
authors.lastname: de Fijter
authors.forename: P M
authors.initials: PM
authors.lastname: ter Wee
authors.forename: L P
authors.initials: LP
authors.lastname: Oe
authors.forename: H A
authors.initials: HA
authors.lastname: Verbrugh
mesh_terms: D000890:Anti-Infective Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D000904:Antibiotics, Antitubercular / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002511:Cephalosporins / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002515:Cephradine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002939:Ciprofloxacin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D004359:Drug Therapy, Combination; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007263:Infusions, Parenteral; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010531:Peritoneal Dialysis, Continuous Ambulatory / Q000009:adverse effects*; D010538:Peritonitis / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000209:etiology / Q000382:microbiology; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012293:Rifampin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D013211:Staphylococcus aureus / Q000302:isolation & purification; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D000890:Anti-Infective Agents; D000904:Antibiotics, Antitubercular; D002511:Cephalosporins; D002939:Ciprofloxacin; D002515:Cephradine; D012293:Rifampin