Dellenbach P, Thomas J L, Guerin V, Ochsenbein E, Contet-Audonneau N
Medical-Surgical and Obstetrical Center of Social Security, Cedex, Schiltigheim, France.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2000 Dec;71 Suppl 1:S47-52. doi: 10.1016/s0020-7292(00)00348-9.
To compare the efficacy and safety of sertaconazole and econazole sustained-release suppositories in the treatment of vulvovaginal candidosis.
369 women with symptoms and signs of vulvovaginitis were enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study. After clinical examination and vaginal sampling, 183 women were treated with a 300-mg sertaconazole suppository and the other 186 with a 150-mg econazole suppository. They were evaluated 1 week after treatment and those who were clinically uncured received a second suppository and were re-assessed 1 week later. All women were evaluated 1 month after the last administration. At each follow-up visit, clinical efficacy was assessed and a vaginal sampling was performed for microscopic examination and culture.
Of the 369 women included, only the 310 who had a positive culture for a strain of Candida were taken into account for efficacy analysis: 150 in the sertaconazole group and 160 in the econazole group. One hundred and five women (49 in the sertaconazole group and 56 in the econazole group) were not clinically cured after 1 week and received a second suppository. There were no differences between the two groups for the rates of clinical recovery (disappearance of signs and symptoms) and mycological recovery (negative culture), 1 week after the first application (62.1 and 67.7%, respectively), 1 week after the second application for women treated twice (72.3 and 80.6%, respectively) and for all patients 1 month after the last application (65.3 and 62.0%, respectively). Among the patients cured 1 week after the last application, the mycological recurrence rate after 1 month was significantly higher in the econazole group (32.7 vs. 19.8%, P=0.035). There was a trend towards better efficacy of sertaconazole after the first application, whereas the two treatments had similar efficacy in women treated twice. There were no serious adverse events and only local irritation was reported, without any statistically significant difference between the two groups.
Single topical administration of sertaconazole and econazole had similar efficacy and safety but the former is associated with a lower rate of mycological recurrence one month after achieving a negative culture.
比较舍他康唑和益康唑缓释栓治疗外阴阴道念珠菌病的疗效和安全性。
369例有外阴阴道炎症状和体征的女性纳入了这项多中心、随机、双盲研究。经过临床检查和阴道采样后,183例女性接受300mg舍他康唑栓治疗,另外186例接受150mg益康唑栓治疗。治疗1周后对她们进行评估,临床未治愈的患者接受第二枚栓剂治疗,并在1周后再次评估。在最后一次给药1个月后对所有女性进行评估。每次随访时,评估临床疗效,并进行阴道采样以进行显微镜检查和培养。
在纳入的369例女性中,仅对310例念珠菌菌株培养阳性的患者进行疗效分析:舍他康唑组150例,益康唑组160例。105例女性(舍他康唑组49例,益康唑组56例)在1周后临床未治愈,接受了第二枚栓剂治疗。两组在首次用药1周后(分别为62.1%和67.7%)、接受两次治疗的女性在第二次用药1周后(分别为72.3%和80.6%)以及所有患者在最后一次用药1个月后(分别为65.3%和62.0%)的临床恢复率(体征和症状消失)和真菌学恢复率(培养阴性)方面均无差异。在最后一次用药1周后治愈的患者中,益康唑组1个月后的真菌学复发率显著更高(32.7%对19.8%,P=0.035)。首次用药后舍他康唑的疗效有更好的趋势,而两种治疗方法在接受两次治疗的女性中疗效相似。没有严重不良事件,仅报告了局部刺激,两组之间无任何统计学显著差异。
舍他康唑和益康唑单次局部给药具有相似的疗效和安全性,但前者在培养转阴1个月后的真菌学复发率较低。