Suppr超能文献

哌拉西林/他唑巴坦与头孢呋辛/甲硝唑治疗腹腔内感染的比较。

Piperacillin/tazobactam compared with cefuroxime/ metronidazole in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections.

作者信息

Ohlin B, Cederberg A, Forssell H, Solhaug J H, Tveit E

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Blekinge County Hospital, Karlskrona, Sweden.

出版信息

Eur J Surg. 1999 Sep;165(9):875-84. doi: 10.1080/11024159950189393.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of piperacillin/tazobactam compared with cefuroxime/metronidazole in the treatment of patients with intra-abdominal infections.

DESIGN

Randomised open study.

SETTING

16 Swedish and 6 Norwegian hospitals.

SUBJECTS

269 patients with intra-abdominal infections were randomised and treated with at least one dose of each study drug. 205 patients, 105 treated with piperacillin/tazobactam and 100 with cefuroxime, were clinically evaluable for follow up (had been given the full course of treatment).

INTERVENTION

Patients were given piperacillin 4g/tazobactam 0.5 g every 8 hours or cefuroxime 1.5 g every 8 hours plus metronidazole 1.5 g every 24 hours. Each patient was to be treated for a minimum of 3 days and not more than 10 days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical evaluation of infection at the end of and 4-6 weeks after treatment. Evaluation of safety and tolerance to the drugs and bacteriological susceptibility to the treatment drugs.

RESULTS

In the intention to treat analysis treatment was equally successful for piperacillin/ tazobactam (103/140, 74%) and the cefuroxime/metronidazole groups (90/129, 70%) (p = 0.6). Corresponding figures for the clinically evaluable group were 102/105 (97%) and 94/100 (94%) for piperacillin/tazobactam and cefuroxime/metronidazole groups, respectively, at the end of treatment. At late follow up, 92/105 (88%) and 83/100 (83%) in the two groups, respectively, remained free of infection. The side effects of the treatment were mild and evenly distributed between the two groups. Most pathogens were susceptible to the drugs in both treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Both piperacillin/tazobactam and cefuroxime/metronidazole are well suited to the treatment of patients with intra-abdominal infections, and we found no significant difference between the two. The drugs were safe and well tolerated in the regimens used.

摘要

目的

评估哌拉西林/他唑巴坦与头孢呋辛/甲硝唑相比治疗腹腔内感染患者的效果。

设计

随机开放研究。

地点

16家瑞典医院和6家挪威医院。

受试者

269例腹腔内感染患者被随机分组,接受至少一剂每种研究药物的治疗。205例患者(105例接受哌拉西林/他唑巴坦治疗,100例接受头孢呋辛治疗)可进行临床随访评估(接受了完整疗程治疗)。

干预措施

患者每8小时接受4g哌拉西林/0.5g他唑巴坦治疗,或每8小时接受1.5g头孢呋辛治疗加每24小时接受1.5g甲硝唑治疗。每位患者至少治疗3天且不超过10天。

主要观察指标

治疗结束时及治疗后4 - 6周对感染进行临床评估。评估药物的安全性和耐受性以及治疗药物的细菌敏感性。

结果

在意向性治疗分析中,哌拉西林/他唑巴坦组(103/140,74%)和头孢呋辛/甲硝唑组(90/129,70%)治疗成功率相当(p = 0.6)。在临床可评估组中,治疗结束时,哌拉西林/他唑巴坦组和头孢呋辛/甲硝唑组相应的数据分别为102/105(97%)和94/100(94%)。在后期随访中,两组分别有92/105(88%)和83/100(83%)无感染。治疗的副作用轻微,且在两组间分布均匀。两个治疗组中的大多数病原体对药物敏感。

结论

哌拉西林/他唑巴坦和头孢呋辛/甲硝唑均非常适合治疗腹腔内感染患者,我们发现两者之间无显著差异。在所使用的治疗方案中,这些药物安全且耐受性良好。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验