Role of Azithromycin in Enteric Fever
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i6.1654Abstract
Background: In low- and middle-income nations, particularly in South Asia, where growing resistance to first-line and fluoroquinolone antibiotics has made treatment more difficult, enteric (typhoid) fever continues to be a serious public health concern. An alternate therapy option that has showed potential is azithromycin, an oral macrolide antibiotic. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of local data assessing its therapeutic effectiveness, especially in young patients. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess azithromycin's clinical results, safety, and tolerability in treating pediatric patients (ages 2–12) with enteric fever in a local healthcare facility. Methods: Over the course of six months, 121 pediatric children receiving azithromycin for clinically confirmed enteric fever participated in a cross-sectional, qualitative study. Structured interviews were used to gather clinical data, which were then backed up by TyphiDot or other lab testing. Defervescence time, clinical improvement by Day 7, and side effects were important end indicators. Results: Of the 121 patients, 86.8% attained defervescence in five days, and 85.1% demonstrated clinical improvement by Day 7. 83.5% of patients reported no side effects from azithromycin, indicating that medication was well tolerated. The most frequent adverse effects, which included nausea (8.3%) and abdominal pain (5%), were minor and self-limiting. Treatment success was positively connected with positive TyphiDot (IgM or IgM+IgG), while positive responses were seen even in clinically diagnosed individuals without confirming testing. Conclusion: For pediatric enteric fever, azithromycin is a safe, well-tolerated, and clinically effective oral antibiotic that provides a useful substitute in outpatient and resource-constrained settings. These results provide credence to its inclusion in regional therapy protocols. It is advised that research that is more extensive be done to validate these findings and guide national policy.
Downloads
References
1. Stanaway, J. D., Reiner, R. C., Blacker, B. F., Goldberg, E. M., Khalil, I. A., Troeger, C. E., ... & Hay, S. I. (2019). The global burden of typhoid and paratyphoid fevers: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 19(4), 369-381.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(18)30685-6/fulltext
2. Gay, F. P. (1918). Typhoid fever considered as a problem of scientific medicine. Macmillan.
3. Parry, C. M., Hien, T. T., Dougan, G., White, N. J., & Farrar, J. J. (2002). Typhoid fever. New England Journal of Medicine, 347(22), 1770-1782.
https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra020201
4. Wong, V. K., Baker, S., Pickard, D. J., Parkhill, J., Page, A. J., Feasey, N. A., ... & Dougan, G. (2015). Phylogeographical analysis of the dominant multidrug-resistant H58 clade of Salmonella Typhi identifies inter-and intracontinental transmission events. Nature genetics, 47(6), 632-639.
https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3281
5. Tacconelli, E., Carrara, E., Savoldi, A., Harbarth, S., Mendelson, M., Monnet, D. L., ... & Zorzet, A. (2018). Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. The Lancet infectious diseases, 18(3), 318-327.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(17)30753-3/abstract
6. Behrman, R. E., & Vaughan, V. I. (1983). Nelson textbook of pediatrics (No. Ed. 12, pp. xxxiv+-1899pp).
https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19851470771
7. Harish, B., & Menezes, G. (2011). Antimicrobial resistance in typhoidal salmonellae. Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology, 29(3), 223-229.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0255-0857.83904
8. Crump, J., & Mintz, E. (2010). Global trends in typhoid and paratyphoid fever. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 50(2), 241-246.
https://doi.org/10.1086/649541
9. Menezes, G., Harish, B., Khan, M., Goessens, W., & Hays, J. (2012). Antimicrobial resistance trends in blood culture positive Salmonella Typhi isolates from Pondicherry, India, 2005–2009. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 18(3), 239-245.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03546.x
10. Kumar, P., & Kumar, R. (2016). Enteric fever. The Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 84(3), 227-230.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-016-2246-4
11. Trivedi, N., & Shah, P. (2012). A meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of azithromycin over the alternate drugs used for treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine, 58(2), 112-118.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0022-3859.97172
12. Geetha, V., Yugendran, T., Srinivasan, R., & Harish, B. (2014). Plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance in typhoidal salmonellae: A preliminary report from South India. Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology, 32(1), 31-34.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0255-0857.124292
13. Aggarwal, A., Ghosh, A., Gomber, S., Mitra, M., & Parikh, A. O. (2011). Efficacy and safety of azithromycin for uncomplicated typhoid fever: An open label non-comparative study. Indian Pediatrics, 48(7), 553-556.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-011-0093-y
14. Rafique, S., Rasheed, S., Lodhi, M. A., & Ahmad, A. M. (2020). Comparison of clinical effectiveness of azithromycin versus ceftriaxone in treatment of enteric fever in paediatric population. Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal, (1), S45.
15. Islam, M. A., Mobarak, M. R., Hasan, A. R., & Hanif, M. (2015). Clinical efficacy of azithromycin in typhoid and paratyphoid fever in children. Journal of Enam Medical College, 5(1), 34-38.
https://doi.org/10.3329/jemc.v5i1.21495
16. Rowe, B., Ward, L. R., & Threlfall, E. J. (1997). Multidrug-resistant Salmonella typhi: A worldwide epidemic. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 24(Supplement_1), S106-S109.
https://doi.org/10.1093/clinids/24.supplement_1.s106
17. Crump, J., & Mintz, E. (2010). Global trends in typhoid and paratyphoid fever. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 50(2), 241-246.
https://doi.org/10.1086/649541
18. Dutta S, Sur D, Manna B, et al. (2014). Emergence of highly resistant strains of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi in India. J Clin Microbiol, 52(5), 1819–20.
19. Wain, J., Hendriksen, R. S., Mikoleit, M. L., Keddy, K. H., & Ochiai, R. L. (2015). Typhoid fever. The Lancet, 385(9973), 1136-1145.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62708-7
20. Girgis, N. I., Butler, T., Frenck, R. W., Sultan, Y., Brown, F. M., Tribble, D., & Khakhria, R. (1999). Azithromycin versus ciprofloxacin for treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in a randomized trial in Egypt that included patients with multidrug resistance. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 43(6), 1441-1444.
https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.43.6.1441
21. Pandit A, Arjyal A, Day JN, et al. An open-label randomized comparison of azithromycin versus chloramphenicol for the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in Nepal. PLoS One. 2007;2(11):e1248
22. Effa, E., & Bukirwa, H. (2006). Azithromycin for treating uncomplicated typhoid and paratyphoid fever (enteric fever). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006083
23. Aggarwal A, Arora U, Khanna S. (2011). Comparison of efficacy of azithromycin and ceftriaxone in the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever. J Indian Med Assoc, 109(10), 740–2.
24. Parry, C. M., Hien, T. T., Dougan, G., White, N. J., & Farrar, J. J. (2002). Typhoid fever. New England Journal of Medicine, 347(22), 1770-1782.
https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra020201
25. Islam, A., Butler, T., Kabir, I., & Alam, N. H. (1993). Treatment of typhoid fever with ceftriaxone for 5 days or chloramphenicol for 14 days: A randomized clinical trial. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 37(8), 1572-1575.
https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.37.8.1572
26. Qamar, F. N., Yousafzai, M. T., Khalid, M., Kazi, A. M., Lohana, H., Karim, S., Khan, A., Hotwani, A., Qureshi, S., Kabir, F., Aziz, F., Memon, N. M., Domki, M. H., & Hasan, R. (2018). Outbreak investigation of ceftriaxone-resistant Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi and its risk factors among the general population in Hyderabad, Pakistan: A matched case-control study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 18(12), 1368-1376.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indus Journal of Bioscience Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
