Mupirocin cream is as effective as oral cephalexin in the treatment of secondarily infected wounds

BACKGROUND. Topical antimicrobials have been considered for treatment of se condarily infected wounds because of the potential for reduced risk of adve rse effects and greater patient convenience. We compared mupirocin cream wi th oral cephalexin in the treatment of wounds such as small lacerations, ab rasions, or sutured wounds. METHODS. In 2 identical randomized double-blind studies, 706 patients with secondarily infected wounds (small lacerations, abrasions, or sutured wound s) received either mupirocin cream topically 3 times daily or cephalexin or ally 4 times daily for 10 days. RESULTS. Clinical success at follow-up was equivalent in the two groups: 95 .1% and 95.3% in the mupirocin cream and the cephalexin groups, respectivel y (95% confidence interval [CI], -4.0% to 3.6%; P =.89). The intention-to-t reat success rate was 83% in both groups. Bacteriologic success at follow-u p was also comparable: 96.9% in the mupirocin cream and 98.9% in the cephal exin groups (95% CI, -6.0% to 2.0%; P =.22). The occurrence of adverse expe riences related to study treatment was similar for the 2 groups, with fewer patients in the mupirocin cream group reporting diarrhea (1.1% vs 2.3% for cephalexin). CONCLUSIONS. Mupirocin cream applied topically 3 times daily is as effectiv e as oral cephalexin given 4 times daily for the treatment of secondarily i nfected wounds and was well tolerated.