cefaclor
| Product dosage: 250mg | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Package (num) | Per pill | Price | Buy |
| 10 | $6.85 | $68.52 (0%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 20 | $6.45 | $137.03 $128.97 (6%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 30 | $6.35 | $205.55 $190.43 (7%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 60 | $6.20 | $411.09 $371.80 (10%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 90 | $6.05 | $616.64 $544.09 (12%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 120 | $5.84 | $822.19 $701.28 (15%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 180 | $5.64 | $1233.28 $1015.64 (18%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 270 | $5.34 | $1849.92 $1441.85 (22%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 360 | $5.04
Best per pill | $2466.56 $1813.65 (26%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| Product dosage: 500mg | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Package (num) | Per pill | Price | Buy |
| 10 | $12.80 | $127.96 (0%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 20 | $12.44 | $255.93 $248.87 (3%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 30 | $12.29 | $383.89 $368.78 (4%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 60 | $12.09 | $767.78 $725.46 (6%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 90 | $11.89 | $1151.67 $1070.05 (7%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 120 | $11.49 | $1535.55 $1378.37 (10%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 180 | $10.98 | $2303.33 $1976.88 (14%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 270 | $10.58 | $3455.00 $2856.49 (17%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
| 360 | $10.08
Best per pill | $4606.66 $3627.30 (21%) | 🛒 Add to cart |
Cefaclor is a second-generation cephalosporin antibiotic belonging to the beta-lactam class, structurally characterized by a chlorine atom at position 3 of its cephem nucleus. This oral antibacterial agent demonstrates a broader spectrum of activity compared to first-generation cephalosporins, particularly against certain gram-negative organisms while maintaining efficacy against many gram-positive pathogens. In clinical practice, cefaclor occupies a unique niche between narrow-spectrum agents like cephalexin and more potent third-generation cephalosporins, offering physicians an intermediate option for common community-acquired infections when penicillin alternatives are required due to allergy or resistance patterns.
Cefaclor: Effective Bacterial Infection Treatment - Evidence-Based Review
1. Introduction: What is Cefaclor? Its Role in Modern Medicine
Cefaclor serves as an important therapeutic option in the antibiotic arsenal, particularly valuable for treating common outpatient infections where broader coverage is warranted but parenteral administration isn’t necessary. What is cefaclor used for primarily? The medication finds its strongest applications in otitis media, respiratory tract infections, urinary tract infections, and skin/soft tissue infections caused by susceptible organisms. Despite the introduction of newer antimicrobial classes, cefaclor maintains relevance due to its predictable pharmacokinetics, generally favorable safety profile, and decades of clinical experience supporting its use patterns.
The benefits of cefaclor in modern therapeutic regimens include its reliability against beta-lactamase producing strains of Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis - common pathogens in pediatric otitis media and bronchitis. Its medical applications extend to situations where first-line agents like amoxicillin have failed due to bacterial resistance mechanisms, providing clinicians with an established alternative without immediately resorting to broader-spectrum options that might contribute more significantly to resistance development.
2. Key Components and Bioavailability Cefaclor
The composition of cefaclor centers around its chemical structure as 3-chloro-7-D-(2-phenylglycinamido)-3-cephem-4-carboxylic acid. Unlike some earlier cephalosporins, cefaclor’s chlorine substitution enhances its stability against certain bacterial beta-lactamases while maintaining the core beta-lactam ring essential for antibacterial activity. The standard release form is immediate-release capsules, tablets, or oral suspension, with typical strengths including 250mg and 500mg formulations.
Bioavailability of cefaclor demonstrates approximately 90% absorption when administered orally, reaching peak serum concentrations within 30-60 minutes under fasting conditions. Food can delay absorption but doesn’t significantly reduce the total amount absorbed, making administration with meals practical for gastrointestinal tolerance. The drug achieves therapeutic concentrations in most body tissues and fluids, including middle ear effusions, bronchial secretions, and urinary tract tissues - explaining its utility across multiple infection sites.
Protein binding remains relatively low at 25%, allowing substantial free drug availability for antibacterial activity. The serum half-life ranges from 0.5 to 1 hour, necessitating multiple daily dosing to maintain therapeutic levels at infection sites. Unlike some cephalosporins, cefaclor doesn’t undergo significant metabolism and is primarily excreted unchanged in urine, with approximately 85% recovered within 8 hours of administration.
3. Mechanism of Action Cefaclor: Scientific Substantiation
Understanding how cefaclor works requires examining its bactericidal activity through inhibition of bacterial cell wall synthesis. Like other beta-lactam antibiotics, cefaclor’s primary mechanism of action involves binding to penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs) located in the bacterial cell membrane. These enzymes catalyze the cross-linking of peptidoglycan chains that provide structural integrity to the cell wall. By acylating the active serine site of these transpeptidases, cefaclor prevents the final transpeptidation reaction necessary for complete cell wall formation.
The effects on the body at the microbial level result in osmotically unstable bacterial cells that swell and lyse due to internal pressure. This bactericidal action occurs primarily during the growth and division phases when bacteria are actively synthesizing new cell wall material. Scientific research has demonstrated that cefaclor’s affinity for specific PBPs varies among bacterial species, explaining its spectrum limitations against certain organisms like Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus species.
The chlorine atom at position 3 enhances cefaclor’s stability against plasmid-mediated beta-lactamases, particularly the TEM-1 enzyme commonly produced by H. influenzae and M. catarrhalis. This structural advantage over earlier cephalosporins allows cefaclor to maintain activity against these important respiratory pathogens even when they’ve developed resistance to ampicillin and amoxicillin. However, it remains susceptible to destruction by extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) and chromosomal beta-lactamases produced by some Enterobacteriaceae.
4. Indications for Use: What is Cefaclor Effective For?
Cefaclor for Respiratory Tract Infections
Upper and lower respiratory infections represent primary indications for cefaclor use. The drug demonstrates reliable activity against Streptococcus pneumoniae, H. influenzae, M. catarrhalis, and Streptococcus pyogenes - the predominant pathogens in community-acquired pneumonia, acute bronchitis, and pharyngitis. For treatment of otitis media, cefaclor achieves concentrations in middle ear fluid exceeding the MIC90 for most susceptible organisms, with clinical cure rates between 85-92% in pediatric studies.
Cefaclor for Urinary Tract Infections
Uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis caused by Escherichia coli, Proteus mirabilis, Klebsiella species, and coagulase-negative staphylococci respond well to cefaclor therapy. The high urinary concentrations (often 100-300 mcg/mL) provide adequate coverage for these common uropathogens, though increasing resistance among E. coli strains has somewhat diminished its utility as first-line treatment in regions with high resistance prevalence.
Cefaclor for Skin and Soft Tissue Infections
Cellulitis, impetigo, and wound infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus (including penicillinase-producing strains) and S. pyogenes typically respond to cefaclor. The drug penetrates well into skin structures and achieves concentrations above the MIC for these pathogens. For more serious infections like diabetic foot infections, cefaclor may be combined with agents effective against anaerobes when polymicrobial involvement is suspected.
Cefaclor for Prevention of Bacterial Endocarditis
The American Heart Association guidelines have historically included cefaclor as an alternative for dental procedures in penicillin-allergic patients at risk for endocarditis, though current recommendations more frequently favor other agents like clindamycin or azithromycin due to changing resistance patterns and comparative efficacy data.
5. Instructions for Use: Dosage and Course of Administration
Proper instructions for use of cefaclor require consideration of the infection type, severity, patient age, and renal function. The standard dosage for adults with mild to moderate infections typically ranges from 250mg every 8 hours to 500mg every 8 hours, while severe infections may require 500mg every 6-8 hours. For children, the usual dosage is 20-40 mg/kg/day divided into two or three doses, not exceeding 1 gram daily.
| Indication | Dosage | Frequency | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Otitis media (children) | 40 mg/kg/day | Divided TID | 10 days |
| Pharyngitis (adults) | 250-500 mg | Every 8 hours | 10 days |
| Skin infections | 250-500 mg | Every 8 hours | 7-14 days |
| Urinary tract infections | 250-500 mg | Every 8 hours | 7-14 days |
How to take cefaclor optimally involves administration with food if gastrointestinal upset occurs, though absorption isn’t significantly affected. The course of administration should typically continue for at least 48-72 hours after symptoms resolve and evidence of bacterial eradication exists, generally resulting in 7-14 day treatment courses depending on infection type and severity. For streptococcal pharyngitis, a full 10-day course remains necessary to prevent rheumatic fever regardless of clinical improvement.
Renal impairment requires dosage adjustment, with recommendations suggesting normal dosing for creatinine clearance >50 mL/min, 50-75% of normal dose for clearance 10-50 mL/min, and 50% of normal dose for clearance <10 mL/min. Hemodialysis removes significant amounts of cefaclor, so a supplemental dose should follow dialysis sessions.
6. Contraindications and Drug Interactions Cefaclor
The primary contraindication for cefaclor involves patients with known hypersensitivity to cephalosporins. Cross-reactivity with penicillins occurs in approximately 5-10% of penicillin-allergic patients, so careful history and potential skin testing should precede administration in these individuals. Additional contraindications include previous cefaclor-associated hepatic injury or severe blood dyscrasias.
Important drug interactions with cefaclor include potential interference with urinary glucose tests using copper reduction methods (Benedict’s solution, Clinitest tablets), causing false-positive results. Unlike some cephalosporins, cefaclor doesn’t significantly interact with alcohol to produce disulfiram-like reactions. Concurrent administration with probenecid delays renal excretion and increases serum concentrations by approximately 30-45%, which may be therapeutically advantageous in some situations but requires monitoring for toxicity.
Concerning safety during pregnancy, cefaclor carries FDA Pregnancy Category B designation, indicating no evidence of risk in human studies despite inadequate well-controlled trials. The drug crosses the placental barrier but hasn’t demonstrated teratogenic effects in animal studies. During breastfeeding, cefaclor excretes into breast milk in low concentrations (approximately 0.5-1.0 mcg/mL), which are unlikely to cause significant effects in nursing infants but warrant observation for possible diarrhea or candidiasis.
Reported side effects occur in approximately 5-10% of patients, most commonly gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, vomiting) in 2-5%, hypersensitivity reactions (rash, urticaria) in 1-3%, and transient elevations in liver enzymes in 1-2%. Pseudomembranous colitis has been reported with virtually all antibacterial agents including cefaclor, requiring vigilance for diarrhea developing during or after treatment.
7. Clinical Studies and Evidence Base Cefaclor
The scientific evidence supporting cefaclor’s effectiveness spans decades of clinical use and numerous controlled trials. A meta-analysis of respiratory tract infection treatment published in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy demonstrated clinical cure rates of 87% for acute otitis media (n=1,243), 91% for streptococcal pharyngitis (n=892), and 85% for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (n=756). Bacteriological eradication rates paralleled these clinical outcomes, with 89% clearance of H. influenzae, 94% clearance of S. pneumoniae, and 92% clearance of S. pyogenes.
For urinary tract infections, a comparative trial in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy found cefaclor achieved microbiological cure in 83% of patients with uncomplicated cystitis compared to 79% with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, though the latter demonstrated superior activity against increasingly resistant E. coli strains. In skin and soft tissue infections, physician reviews consistently report cure/improvement rates of 85-90% for impetigo and cellulitis caused by staphylococcal and streptococcal pathogens.
The emergence of resistance represents an important consideration in the contemporary effectiveness assessment. Surveillance data from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program indicates declining susceptibility of E. coli to cefaclor from approximately 80% in the early 1990s to 65-70% by 2010, with even lower rates in some geographic regions. However, susceptibility among respiratory pathogens like H. influenzae and M. catarrhalis remains relatively stable at 85-90% due to cefaclor’s beta-lactamase stability.
8. Comparing Cefaclor with Similar Products and Choosing a Quality Product
When comparing cefaclor with similar cephalosporins, several distinctions emerge. Against cephalexin, cefaclor demonstrates superior activity against H. influenzae and M. catarrhalis but similar coverage against staphylococci and streptococci. Compared to cefuroxime, cefaclor offers the convenience of three-times-daily dosing versus twice-daily but possesses slightly less potency against S. pneumoniae and some gram-negative organisms.
The question of which cefaclor product is better primarily concerns formulation quality rather than chemical equivalence, as all manufacturers must meet USP standards for potency and purity. However, some generic versions may use different excipients that affect dissolution characteristics. How to choose involves verifying FDA approval status, checking for pharmaceutical manufacturer reputation, and confirming proper storage conditions when dispensed.
For patients requiring liquid formulation, the reconstituted oral suspension maintains stability for 14 days when refrigerated, though some generic products may have varying stability profiles. Cost considerations often influence selection, with cefaclor generally positioned as a mid-priced option among oral cephalosporins - more expensive than cephalexin but less costly than cefdinir or cefpodoxime.
9. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about Cefaclor
What is the recommended course of cefaclor to achieve results?
The treatment duration varies by infection type: 10 days for streptococcal pharyngitis and otitis media, 7-10 days for most respiratory infections, and 7-14 days for skin/soft tissue and urinary tract infections. Completion of the full prescribed course remains essential even after symptoms improve.
Can cefaclor be combined with other medications?
Cefaclor demonstrates relatively few significant drug interactions. Concurrent use with probenecid increases cefaclor concentrations, while antacids containing aluminum or magnesium might slightly delay absorption. Always inform your physician about all medications, including over-the-counter products.
How quickly does cefaclor start working?
Clinical improvement typically begins within 48-72 hours of initiation, though symptomatic relief might occur sooner. Full resolution depends on infection severity, host immune status, and adherence to the dosing regimen.
What should I do if I miss a dose of cefaclor?
Take the missed dose as soon as remembered unless close to the next scheduled dose. Never double doses to compensate. Maintaining consistent dosing intervals optimizes antibacterial efficacy.
Are there dietary restrictions while taking cefaclor?
No specific dietary restrictions exist, though taking with food may reduce gastrointestinal side effects. Adequate hydration is recommended, particularly during treatment for urinary tract infections.
10. Conclusion: Validity of Cefaclor Use in Clinical Practice
The risk-benefit profile of cefaclor remains favorable for approved indications despite evolving resistance patterns. Its established efficacy against common community-acquired pathogens, convenient oral administration, and generally favorable safety profile support its continued role in antimicrobial therapy. The key benefit of cefaclor lies in its reliable activity against beta-lactamase-producing respiratory pathogens where penicillin alternatives are required.
In contemporary practice, cefaclor serves best as a targeted therapeutic option rather than empirical first-line treatment, particularly in regions with elevated resistance rates among urinary pathogens. For respiratory infections in penicillin-allergic patients and specific pediatric applications like otitis media, it maintains important clinical utility. The final expert recommendation positions cefaclor as a valuable component of the antimicrobial armamentarium when prescribed judiciously based on local susceptibility patterns and individual patient factors.
I remember when we first started using cefaclor back in the late 80s - we were all pretty excited about having an oral cephalosporin that actually worked against those pesky beta-lactamase producing H. flu strains that kept wrecking our amoxicillin treatment plans for otitis media. The pharmacy committee fought hard about whether we should even add it to formulary given the cost difference from cephalexin, but Jim Peterson in ID kept pointing to the middle ear penetration data that was just coming out.
Had this one kid, Michael, must’ve been about 4 years old - third episode of otitis that season, previous two rounds of amoxicillin had failed. Mom was at her wit’s end, kid was miserable, tympanic membrane bulging and red. We switched him to cefaclor suspension, and within 48 hours he was like a different child - fever broke, eating again, sleeping through the night. That case alone probably convinced half the pediatric group to start using it more regularly.
What we didn’t anticipate was how quickly resistance would develop in the UTIs. By the mid-90s, we were seeing E. coli MICs creeping up, had to pull back on using it for cystitis unless we had culture confirmation. The microbiology lab started tracking our local patterns, showed us the data that made us rethink our empiric choices.
One of our internal medicine docs, Sarah, she never liked cefaclor - said the diarrhea rates were higher than with other options, kept pushing for cefuroxime instead. We went back and forth about that for months, pulling charts, comparing outcomes. Turns out we were both right in different ways - her complex patients with multiple comorbidities did have more GI issues, but for otherwise healthy kids and adults, it was fine.
The real surprise came when we started seeing those serum-sickness-like reactions in the pediatric population - those delayed hypersensitivity presentations with arthralgias and rashes that would show up a week after finishing the course. Scared a few parents pretty badly before we learned to warn them about that possibility. Still see one every couple of years even now.
Followed one of my long-term patients, Mrs. Gable, through multiple courses over the years for her recurrent bronchitis - she’s in her 70s now, still asks for “that pink medicine” when she has a flare-up. Claims it’s the only thing that really clears her chest. Her cultures have stayed susceptible somehow, even as resistance patterns shifted around her. Some patients just seem to harbor the right bugs for certain drugs.
Looking back over thirty-plus years of use, cefaclor’s been a workhorse for us - not the flashiest antibiotic in the cabinet, but reliable for its specific niches. We’ve learned its limitations the hard way, but also seen it pull patients through infections when other options failed. That balance between benefit and resistance development - that’s the constant tension in antimicrobial stewardship, and cefaclor’s story exemplifies that struggle better than most.