Table 3.
Abstract of the authors who speak and studies about topical antibiotics based on articles in the bibliography.
| Authors | Patients | Disease, condition or treatment | Product | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grothe et al. (Grothe et al., 2016) | 187 | Dialysis | Topical Mupirocin VS placebo AO unspecified VS placebo Topical Mupirocin VS AO unspecified |
74%, 56% y 52% les likely to develop an infection respectively |
| Grothe et al. (Grothe et al., 2016) | – | Dialysis | Gentamicin + Cefazolin Fusidic Acid |
Decrease in infections Fusidic Acid showed significant results but is contraindicated as monotherapy |
| Heal et al. (Heal et al., 2016) | 5427 y 1034 | Surgical wound | AO VS non AO | Demonstrated efficacy of AO |
| Heal et al. (Heal et al., 2016) | 1299 | Surgical wound | AO VS topical antiseptic | Demonstrated efficacy of AO |
| Heal et al. (Heal et al., 2016) | 99 y 219 | Surgical wound | AO VS AO | No significant differences were found between Mupirocin, Neomycin, Bacitracin, Polymyxin |
| Bernardini et al. (Bernardini et al., 1996, 2005) | – | Dialysis | Mupirocin VS Gentamicin Mupirocin VS oral Rifampicin |
No significant differences were found in infection prevention. Gentamicin reduced Gram – infections and Rifampicin caused adverse reactions |
| Perl et al. (Perl et al., 2002), Kalmeijer et al. (Kalmeijer et al., 2002), Konvalinka et al. (Konvalinka et al., 2006), García et al. ((PDF) Use of Nasal Mupirocin for Staphylococcus Aureus: Effect on Nasal Carriers and Nosocomial Infections, n.d.), Suzuki et al. (Suzuki et al., 2003) | – | Surgical patients | Mupirocina intranasal ointment VS placebo or no prophylaxis | Mupirocin did not show significant effectiveness against nosocomial diseases |
| Perl et al. (Perl et al., 2002) | – | Surgical patients carrying Staphylococcus Aureus | Mupirocin intranasal ointment VS placebo | They demonstrated the efficacy of Mupirocin against placebo |
| Shuman et al. (Shuman et al., 2012), Tai et al. (Tai et al., 2013), Bode et al. (Bode et al., 2010) | – | Surgical patients carrying Staphylococcus Aureus | Intranasal Mupirocin + Chlorhexidine gel VS no prophylaxis | The efficacy of Mupirocin + Chlorhexidine was demonstrated |
| Hayek et al. (Hayek et al., 1987) | – | Surgical patients | Chlorhexidine Gluconate VS placebo Bath were held |
It did not show significant differences in the prevention of PSIs. He concluded that its use alone was not effective. |
| Climo et al. (Climo et al., 2013) | – | Surgical patients | Chlorhexidine gel VS non-antimicrobial agent | Chlorhexidine reduced HA-BSI acquisition by negative Staphylococci or fungi, but did not reduce HA-BSI causes by S. Aureus |
| Segers et al. (Segers et al., 2006) | 954 | Surgical patients | Chlorhexidine Gluconate Nasal Ointment VS placebo ointment | Chlorhexidine Gluconate was more effective in the prevention of nosocomial diseases but it was not as effective against the diseases produced by the S. Aureus. |
| Findlay et al. (Findlay et al., 2013) | – | Dialysis | Polyhexanide VS Mupirocin | More infections in the Polyhexanide group |
| Wattanaploy et al. (Wattanaploy et al., 2017) | 23 | Burns | SS VS Polyhexanide gel + iodine (Pontosan) | No significant differences were found |
| Muangman et al. (Muangman et al., 2010) | 70 | Burns | SS VS Aquacel | Less healing time in patients with SS |
| Huang et al. (Huang et al., 2007) | 98 | Burns | SS VS Acticoat | The dressing got les healing time and can be left on for several days |
| Soroff y Sasvary (Soroff and Sasvary, 1994) | 15 | Burns | Collagenase VS SS | Patients treated with Collagenase take les time to have the wound clean and healed |
| Hansbrough et al. (Hansbrough et al., 1995) | 79 | Burns | Collagenase + Polymyxin Sulfate VS SS | Those treated with Collagenase + Polymyxin Sulfate took les time to clean and heal the wound |
| Koning et al. (Koning et al., 2012) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Fusidic Acid VS placebo Retapamulin VS placebo |
More improvement with AO. |
| Eells et al. (Eells et al., 1986), Gould. (Gould: Mupirocin in General Practice: A Placebo-Controlled... - Google Académico, n.d.) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Mupirocin VS placebo | More improvement with Mupirocin. |
| Ruby et al. (Ruby and Nelson, 1973) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Bacitracin VS placebo | No significant differences were found. |
| Farah et al. (Farah et al., 1967) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Gentamicin VS Neomicin | Gentamicin showed better results. |
| Oranje et al. (Oranje et al., 2007) | 519 | Non-bullous impetigo | Retapamulin VS Fusidic Acid | No significant differences were found |
| Koning et al. (Koning et al., 2012) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Mupirocin VS oral Erythromycin | More improvement with Mupirocin. |
| Arredondo. (Arredondo, 1987) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Mupirocin VS oral Dicloxacillin | No significant differences were found |
| Bass et al. (Bass et al., 1997) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Mupirocin VS oral Cephalexin Bacitracin VS oral Cephalexin |
No significant differences were found. Bacitracin was worse tan Oral Cephalexin |
| Welsh et al. (Welsh and Saenz, 1987) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Mupirocin VS oral Ampicillin | No significant differences were found |
| Koranyi et al. (Evaluation of Bacitracin Ointment in the Treatment of Impetigo - PubMed, n.d.) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Bacitracin VS oral Erythromycin | No significant differences were found |
| Ruby et al. (Ruby and Nelson, 1973) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Bacitracin VS oral Penicillin | No significant differences were found |
| Ruby et al. (Ruby and Nelson, 1973) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Bacitracin VS Hexachlorophene (antiseptic) | No significant differences were found |
| Christensen et al. (Christensen and Anehus, 1994) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Fusidic Acid VS Hydrogen Peroxide (antiseptic) | Fusidic Acid showed more efficacy |
| Ciftci et al. (Ciftci et al., 2002) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Mupirocin VS Terbinafine (antifungal) | No significant differences were found |
| Kuniyuki et al. (Kuniyuki et al., 2005) | – | Non-bullous impetigo | Topical Tetracycline + Oral Cefdinir VS Topical Tetracycline + Oral Minomycin Topical tetracycline + Oral Cefdinir VS Topical Tetracycline + Oral Fosfomycin Topical Tetracycline + Oral Minomycin VS Topical Tetracycline + Oral Fosfomycin |
No comparison showed significant differences |
| Moraes Barbosa (Moraes Barbosa: Comparative Study between Topical... - Google Académico, n.d.) | – | Bullous Impetigo | Fusidic Acid VS Neomycin Fusidic Acid VS Bacitracin Chloramphenicol VS Neomycin Chloramphenicol VS Bacitracin |
Fusidic Acid was more effective in both comparisons. In the following two, no significant differences were found between the AO. |
| Moraes Barbosa (Moraes Barbosa: Comparative Study between Topical... - Google Académico, n.d.) | – | Bullous Impetigo | Neomycin VS Oral Erythromycin Bacitracin VS Oral Erythromycin Fusidic Acid VS Oral Erythromycin Chloramphenicol VS Oral Erythromycin |
Neomycin and Bacitracin was significantly les effective. The rest of the comparisons did not find significant differences |
| Wachs et al. (Wachs and Maibach, 1976) | – | Secondary impetigo | Mupirocin VS Oral Cephalexin | No significant differences were found |