View clinical trials related to Infection.
Filter by:Symptomatic urinary tract infections (UTIs) are one of the main causes of morbidity and the main cause of re-hospitalization in subjects with neurogenic bladder. Long-term antibiotic therapy increases the risk of multi-resistant bacterial infections, without reducing the rate of symptomatic UTIs. Our non-comparative preliminary study has shown that Weekly Oral Cyclic Antibiotic Programme (single, weekly dose of antibiotic X on even weeks, and antibiotic Y on odd weeks) seem to drastically reduce both the number of symptomatic UTIs and the number of hospitalizations in patients with neurogenic bladder, without affecting bacterial ecology. The objective of this study is to validate this preliminary work with a large-scale randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study.
The purpose of this study is to assess the safety, efficacy, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of four doses of BMS-663068 with Raltegravir (RAL) + Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (TDF). At least 1 dose of BMS-663068 can be identified which is safe, well tolerated, and efficacious when combined with RAL + TDF for treatment-experienced HIV-1 infected subjects. PHENOSENSE® is a registered trademark of Monogram Biosciences.
This study has been designed to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of GSK Biologicals' HPV-16/18 vaccine when administered according to alternative 2-dose schedules (0,6 months and 0,12 months) in healthy 9-14 year old females as compared to the standard 3-dose schedule (0,1,6 months) in 15-25 year old females.
This study is being conducted to evaluate the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of GSK2251052 in subjects with complicated intra abdominal infections. GSK2251052 will be compared to meropenem, an IV therapy that is approved for use in the treatment of subjects with cIAI. GSK2251052 has a spectrum of microbiological activity that includes pathogens responsible for cIAI.
This study is being conducted to evaluate the safety, efficacy (clinical and microbiological), pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of GSK2251052 and to assess whether it would be a suitable antibiotic for the treatment for febrile lower cUTI and pyelonephritis(complicated and uncomplicated). GSK2251052 will be compared to imipenem-cilastatin, which is an antibiotic commonly used to treat serious cUTI infections. GSK2251052 has a spectrum of microbiological activity that includes pathogens responsible for cUTI.
Intrabdominal antibiotic irrigation will reduce wound and intrabdominal infection.
Data will be extracted from the National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) medical records database, geocoded according to the street address so that the case number, incidence, etc could be mapped. The spatial data would be used to detect the aggregation of HIV cases, existence of "hot spots" and then determine if they may merit further investigation or may have occurred by chance. The results from these GIS-based analyses would address local variations in HIV prevalence and transmission.
Infection remains a difficult-to-treat complication of total knee arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants. The first stage consists of removal of the infected arthroplasty components and the surrounding devitalized tissue, copious pulsed irrigation, and placement of a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. This spacer typically is left in place six weeks, during which time the patient receives intravenous antibiotics. After the surgeon feels that the infection has been eradicated, or if the patient requires repeat debridement, a second operative procedure is performed. While the use of an antibiotic-loaded spacer is well accepted, whether the spacer should immobilize the knee (a so-called "static" spacer) or allow for range of motion (a so-called "articulating" spacer) is controversial. Proponents of articulating spacers argue that they prevent scarring of the musculature surrounding the knee resulting in easier reimplantation, improved long-term knee function, and improved range of motion. Proponents of static spacers argue that immobilization of the periarticular soft tissues aids in clearance of the infection and is simpler to fashion intraoperatively. While good results have been described with both methods, comparative trials have been conflicting as to whether spacer design alters knee function, operative time, and range of motion. Equipoise exists within the literature, and no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to evaluate this issue. The purpose of this study is to compare articulating and static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic infection complicating total knee arthroplasty through a prospective, randomized clinical trial. The goals of this trial are to determine the effect of spacer design upon eradication of infection, knee function, ease of reimplantation, and range of motion. The investigators hypothesize that articulating spacers will provide shorter operative times at reimplantation, while improving knee function and range of motion.
Infection remains one of the most difficult-to-treat complications of total hip arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants.The first stage consists of removal of the infected arthroplasty components and the surrounding devitalized tissue, copious pulsed irrigation, and placement of a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. This spacer is typically left in place six weeks, during which time the patient receives intravenous antibiotics. After the surgeon feels that the infection has been eradicated, or if a second debridement is required, a second operative procedure is performed. While the use of an antibiotic spacer is well accepted, whether the spacer should immobilize the hip (a so-called "static" spacer) or allow for range of motion (a so-called "articulating" spacer) is controversial. Proponents of static spacers argue that immobilization of the periarticular soft tissues aids in clearance of the infection and that these spacers are simpler to fashion intraoperatively. Proponents of articulating spacers argue that they improve hip function, prevent damage to the musculature surrounding the hip, allow easier reimplantation, improve hip function, and prevent dislocation following hip reimplantation. While good results have been described with both methods, comparative trials have been conflicting as to whether spacer design alters hip function, operative time, and dislocation rates. Equipoise exists within the literature, and no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to evaluate this issue. The purpose of this study is to compare articulating and static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic infection complicating total hip arthroplasty through a prospective, randomized clinical trial. The goals of this trial are to determine the effect of spacer design upon eradication of infection, hip function, ease of reimplantation, and dislocation rates. The investigators hypothesize that articulating spacers will provide shorter operative times at replantation while improving hip function and hip dislocation rates following hip reimplantation.
CDI (Clostridium difficile infection) causes diarrheal illness and can cause colitis which may be fatal. A patient being treated for CDI has a 10-25% chance of developing relapse. Recurrent CDI is on the rise. There are few options available to treat recurrent CDI. "Stool transplant" (infusing donor stool into the intestine of the recipient), is not very palatable to either patient or medical personnel. The investigators will isolate intestinal bacteria from donor stool and use this purified mixture of donor bacteria instead of stool transplant. The investigators hypothesize that this cleaner mixture of purely isolated intestinal bacteria from a healthy donor would be equally effective as conventional fecal bacteriotherapy, which uses donor stool. The use of this prepared mixture of aerobic and anaerobic organisms, or probiotic approach, is based on the same principle of fecal flora reconstitution. However our approach would provide a more controlled, reproducible, cleaner and more aesthetically acceptable method of administration, and from a patient safety perspective, would also be a safer strategy than using freshly defecated donor fecal matter.