Suppr超能文献

两种局部用巴龙霉素治疗与葡甲胺锑酸盐治疗新大陆皮肤利什曼病的疗效比较。

Comparison of the effectiveness of two topical paromomycin treatments versus meglumine antimoniate for New World cutaneous leishmaniasis.

作者信息

Armijos Rodrigo X, Weigel M Margaret, Calvopiña Manuel, Mancheno Manuel, Rodriguez Roberto

机构信息

Health Sciences Program, College of Health Sciences, Room 705, 1101 North Campbell Street, The University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX 79902-0581, USA.

出版信息

Acta Trop. 2004 Jul;91(2):153-60. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2004.03.009.

Abstract

The randomized, controlled study compared the therapeutic efficacy and safety of two paromomycin-containing topical preparations with the gold treatment standard, meglumine antimoniate, and with each other in 120 Ecuadorian patients with ulcerated lesions. The two paromomycin treatment comparisons were double-blinded. Group 1 (n = 14) received 15% paromomycin plus 12% methylbenzonium chloride (PR-MBCL) dissolved in a soft white paraffin base, applied twice daily for 30 days. Group 2 (n = 40) was also treated for 30 days with 15% paromomycin plus 10% urea (PR-U) dissolved in the same paraffin base. Group 3 (n = 40) received 20mg/kg/day of IM meglumine antimoniate (MA) for 10 days as per Ecuadorian Ministry of Public Health recommendations at the time of the study. The 10-day treatment was completed by 90% of the MA group compared to 72.5% of the PR-MBCL (X2 = 4.0, P = 0.045) and 75% of the PM-U (X2 = 3.1, P > 0.05) groups whose treatment regime lasted 20 days longer than the MA treatment. Post-treatment lesion burning, redness, inflammation, and soreness were more common in the two paromomycin groups compared to MA group (P < 0.05). The frequency of treatment-related side effects in the two paromomycin groups was similar. Six weeks after the start of treatment, 80.6% of MA subjects were clinically cured compared to 48.3% in the PR-MBCL (X2 = 6.1, P = 0.014) and 40% in the PM-U groups (X2 = 12.6, P = 0.002). By 12 weeks, the proportion of clinically cured subjects in the MA (91.7%) compared to PM-MBCL (79.3%) or PM-U (70%) groups was not significantly different (P > 0.05). MA-treated subjects clinically cured by 12 weeks had a faster mean healing time (29.5 +/- 12.2 days) compared to those in the PM-MBCL (versus 43.1 +/- 14.4 days, t = -3.7, P = 0.001) or PR-U groups (43.5 +/- 17 days; t = -3.2, P = 0.002). During the 48-week post-treatment follow-up period, infection reactivation was observed in 15.2% of the MA subjects compared to 17.4% in the PM-MBCL and 10.5% PM-U of subjects diagnosed as clinically healed by 12 weeks (P > 0.05). The results suggest that although the time required for the clinical healing of ulcerated lesions takes longer, topical paromomycin may be an acceptable therapeutic alternative in endemic areas where meglumine antimoniate is not available, is too costly or medically contraindicated.

摘要

这项随机对照研究在120名患有溃疡性病变的厄瓜多尔患者中,比较了两种含巴龙霉素的局部用制剂与金标准治疗药物葡甲胺锑酸盐的治疗效果和安全性,以及这两种含巴龙霉素制剂之间的疗效和安全性。对两种含巴龙霉素治疗方法的比较采用双盲法。第1组(n = 14)接受溶解于软白石蜡基质中的15%巴龙霉素加12%苄基氯化铵(PR-MBCL),每天涂抹两次,持续30天。第2组(n = 40)同样用溶解于相同石蜡基质中的15%巴龙霉素加10%尿素(PR-U)治疗30天。第3组(n = 40)按照研究时厄瓜多尔公共卫生部的建议,接受每天20mg/kg的葡甲胺锑酸盐(MA)肌肉注射,持续10天。MA组90%的患者完成了10天的治疗,而PR-MBCL组为72.5%(X2 = 4.0,P = 0.045),PR-U组为75%(X2 = 3.1,P > 0.05),后两组的治疗疗程比MA组长20天。与MA组相比,两种含巴龙霉素组治疗后病变部位的灼痛、发红、炎症和酸痛更为常见(P < 0.05)。两种含巴龙霉素组与治疗相关的副作用发生率相似。治疗开始六周后,MA组80.6%的患者临床治愈,而PR-MBCL组为48.3%(X2 = 6.1,P = 0.014),PR-U组为40%(X2 = 12.6,P = 0.002)。到12周时,MA组(91.7%)临床治愈患者的比例与PR-MBCL组(79.3%)或PR-U组(70%)相比,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。到12周时临床治愈的MA组患者的平均愈合时间(29.5 +/- 12.2天)比PR-MBCL组(43.1 +/- 14.4天,t = -3.7,P = 0.001)或PR-U组(43.5 +/- 17天;t = -3.2,P = 0.002)更快。在治疗后48周的随访期内,12周时被诊断为临床治愈的MA组患者中15.2%出现感染复发,PR-MBCL组为17.4%,PR-U组为10.5%(P > 0.05)。结果表明,虽然溃疡性病变临床愈合所需时间较长,但在无法获得葡甲胺锑酸盐、该药成本过高或存在医学禁忌的流行地区,局部用巴龙霉素可能是一种可接受的治疗选择。

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