This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Double-Blind Trial Comparing Tetracycline and Clindamycin

Eugenia T. Poulos, MD; Francis J. Tedesco, MD

Arch Dermatol. 1976;112(7):974-976.

Abstract
A double-blind prospective study was undertaken to compare low-dosage tetracycline hydrochloride and clindamycin hydrate hydrochloride in the treatment of patients with pustular acne. Clinical improvement was noted in 93.7% of those receiving tetracycline and in 92.8% of those receiving clindamycin. Of those patients who were receiving clindamycin, two patients developed diarrhea and one patient developed pseudomembranous colitis. We conclude, therefore, that clindamycin should not be used as a primary drug in the treatment of acne.

(Arch Dermatol 112:974-976, 1976)

Author Affiliations
From the divisions of dermatology and gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis. Dr Tedesco is now at the University of Miami School of Medicine, Fla.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication Oct 16, 1975.

Reprint requests to Department of Medicine, University of Miami School of Medicine, PO Box 520875, Biscayne Annex, Miami, FL 33152 (Dr Tedesco).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Topical v Systemic Agent Treatment for Papulopustular Acne: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis
Stern et al.
Arch Dermatol 1984;120:1571-1578.
ABSTRACT  

Topical Clindamycin Formulations for the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris: An Evaluation
McKenzie et al.
Arch Dermatol 1981;117:630-634.
ABSTRACT  

Topical Clindamycin in Acne Vulgaris: Safety and Stability
Algra et al.
Arch Dermatol 1977;113:1390-1391.
ABSTRACT