de Louvois J, Dagan R, Tessin I
Co-ordination Unit, Public Health Laboratory Service Board, London, UK.
Eur J Pediatr. 1992 Dec;151(12):876-84. doi: 10.1007/BF01954122.
We report a prospective, non-blind, randomised, multicentre, parallel group, multinational investigation to compare ceftazidime to aminoglycoside based regimens as empirical treatment in 1316 cases of suspected sepsis in the newborn. In each of the 15 study centres either ceftazidime alone (CAZ) or ceftazidime + ampicillin (CAZ + AMP) was compared to an amino-glycoside/ampicillin combination (AG + AMP). In all cases treatment was based on "an intention to treat". Bacteria considered to be pathogenic were isolated from 176/1316 (13.4%) patients. The incidence of proven infection varied from 39% in a Yugoslav centre to 6% in a British centre; a further 489/1316 (37.1%) patients fulfilled the criteria for clinically suspected sepsis. A total of 210 bacterial isolates from 197 infection sites in 176 patients were considered to be clinically significant. The cure rate for evaluable patients with proven infection who were treated with CAZ + AMP (97%, 30/31) was significantly higher than that for the corresponding patients treated with AG + AMP (66%, 26/39), (P < 0.002). The difference in cure rate between CAZ monotherapy (79%, 34/43) and AG + AMP (86%, 32/37) was not significant. Treatment failed in 28/150 (18.7%) evaluable patients. There were significantly fewer failures (P < 0.001) with CAZ + AMP than with AG + AMP therapy. There were 55 staphylococcal infections. Treatment was successful in 16/19 evaluable patients treated with CAZ or CAZ + AMP and in 16/29 evaluable patients treated with AG + AMP. None of the study centres encountered problems with ceftazidime resistant bacteria. The cure rate for patients with only clinical and radiological evidence of sepsis was greater than 94% in all treatment groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
我们报告了一项前瞻性、非盲法、随机、多中心、平行组、跨国研究,以比较头孢他啶与基于氨基糖苷类的治疗方案,作为对1316例疑似新生儿败血症病例的经验性治疗。在15个研究中心中的每个中心,单独使用头孢他啶(CAZ)或头孢他啶+氨苄西林(CAZ + AMP)与氨基糖苷类/氨苄西林联合用药(AG + AMP)进行比较。在所有病例中,治疗均基于“意向性治疗”原则。从176/1316(13.4%)例患者中分离出被认为是致病性的细菌。确诊感染的发生率从南斯拉夫一个中心的39%到英国一个中心的6%不等;另有489/1316(37.1%)例患者符合临床疑似败血症的标准。在176例患者的197个感染部位共分离出210株细菌,被认为具有临床意义。接受CAZ + AMP治疗的确诊感染可评估患者的治愈率(97%,30/31)显著高于接受AG + AMP治疗的相应患者(66%,26/39),(P < 0.002)。CAZ单药治疗(79%,34/43)与AG + AMP治疗(86%,32/37)的治愈率差异不显著。150例可评估患者中有28例(18.7%)治疗失败。CAZ + AMP治疗的失败病例显著少于AG + AMP治疗(P < 0.001)。有55例葡萄球菌感染。接受CAZ或CAZ + AMP治疗的19例可评估患者中有16例治疗成功,接受AG + AMP治疗的29例可评估患者中有16例治疗成功。没有研究中心遇到对头孢他啶耐药细菌的问题。所有治疗组中仅有临床和影像学败血症证据的患者治愈率均大于94%。(摘要截短于250字)