Suppr超能文献

头虱和 spinosad 的使用。

Head lice and the use of spinosad.

机构信息

Arnold & Marie Schwartz College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York, USA.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2012 Jan;34(1):14-23. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2011.11.026. Epub 2011 Dec 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Head lice infestations are responsible for social and economic distress. Despite a reported increase in resistance, permethrin 1% is still the first-line treatment of head lice. Alternative topical pediculicidal agents include malathion and benzyl alcohol, but resistance is of growing concern. In 2011, a new pediculicide, spinosad, was introduced.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to review the clinical pharmacology, efficacy, tolerability, and current place in therapy of spinosad for the treatment of head lice.

METHODS

Pertinent articles and abstracts were identified through searches of MEDLINE/Ebsco and MEDLINE/Ovid from 1948 to September 2011 and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from 1966 to September 2011.

RESULTS

Two reports described 3 trials of spinosad used for the treatment of head lice. One study (n = 120) demonstrated efficacy of both spinosad 0.5% and spinosad 1% compared with placebo, with 82.5% and 86.1% of patients free of live lice 14 days after treatment, respectively, compared with 25.6% in the placebo group (P < 0.001 for each treatment). The difference between the spinosad 0.5% and 1% treatment groups was not significant. Two trials (n = 1038) comparing spinosad 0.9% with permethrin 1% reported greater efficacy for spinosad with absence of live lice 14 days after 1 or 2 treatments for 84.6% and 86.7%, respectively, of primary cases compared with 44.9% and 42.9% with permethrin (P < 0.001 for both studies). The most common reported adverse events were eye and scalp irritation, but they were not statistically significant (P = 0.329 and P = 0.395, respectively). Only application-site erythema reactions showed statistical significance, with 6.8% in the permethrin group versus 3.1% in the spinosad group (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited, the available literature suggests that spinosad is an effective and well-tolerated agent for the treatment of head lice. In a time of increasing resistance, spinosad has demonstrated superior performance compared with permethrin. A review of the literature did not identify any studies comparing spinosad to benzyl alcohol 5% or malathion 0.5%.

摘要

背景

头虱感染会造成社会和经济方面的困扰。尽管有报道称其抗药性有所增加,但仍然首选使用 1%的扑灭司林进行头虱治疗。其他局部灭虱药物还包括马拉硫磷和苯甲醇,但抗药性问题日益严重。2011 年,一种新型灭虱剂——螺虫乙酯问世。

目的

本研究旨在综述螺虫乙酯治疗头虱的临床药理学、疗效、耐受性以及当前的治疗地位。

方法

通过检索 MEDLINE/Ebsco 和 MEDLINE/Ovid 从 1948 年到 2011 年 9 月和国际药学文摘从 1966 年到 2011 年 9 月的相关文章和摘要。

结果

有两份报告描述了 3 项螺虫乙酯治疗头虱的试验。其中一项研究(n=120)显示,与安慰剂相比,使用 0.5%和 1%的螺虫乙酯均具有疗效,分别有 82.5%和 86.1%的患者在治疗后 14 天内无活虱,而安慰剂组仅为 25.6%(每种治疗方法均 P<0.001)。0.5%和 1%螺虫乙酯治疗组之间的差异无统计学意义。两项比较 0.9%螺虫乙酯与 1%扑灭司林的试验(n=1038)显示,在分别进行 1 次和 2 次治疗后,14 天内无活虱的主要病例分别为 84.6%和 86.7%,而使用扑灭司林则为 44.9%和 42.9%(两项研究均 P<0.001)。最常见的不良反应报告为眼部和头皮刺激,但无统计学意义(P=0.329 和 P=0.395)。只有局部应用红斑反应具有统计学意义,扑灭司林组为 6.8%,螺虫乙酯组为 3.1%(P=0.007)。

结论

尽管文献有限,但现有文献表明螺虫乙酯是一种有效且耐受性良好的头虱治疗药物。在抗药性日益增加的情况下,螺虫乙酯的疗效优于扑灭司林。对文献的回顾并未发现任何将螺虫乙酯与 5%苯甲醇或 0.5%马拉硫磷进行比较的研究。

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