Suppr超能文献

环丙沙星与阿洛西林联用对比庆大霉素与阿洛西林联用治疗发热性中性粒细胞减少症患者的随机多中心研究

Randomized multicentre study of ciprofloxacin and azlocillin versus gentamicin and azlocillin in the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients.

作者信息

Philpott-Howard J N, Barker K F, Wade J J, Kaczmarski R S, Smedley J C, Mufti G J

机构信息

Department of Medical Microbiology, Kings College School of Medicine & Dentistry, London, UK.

出版信息

J Antimicrob Chemother. 1990 Dec;26 Suppl F:89-99. doi: 10.1093/jac/26.suppl_f.89.

Abstract

In a randomized multicentre study ciprofloxacin combined with azlocillin was compared with gentamicin and azlocillin for the treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients. In 147 evaluable episodes in 108 patients, 80 patients received ciprofloxacin/azlocillin and 67 received gentamicin/azlocillin. The two treatment groups were comparable in terms of age, underlying diagnosis, and duration of neutropenia. Microbiologically documented infections were the cause of fever in 34 (42.5%) and 29 (43.3%) episodes in the ciprofloxacin/azlocillin and gentamicin/azlocillin groups respectively. At the end of therapy, 46 patients (57.5%) receiving ciprofloxacin/azlocillin showed complete resolution compared with 30 (44.7%) for the gentamicin/azlocillin group (P = 0.14). The clinical response rate for microbiologically documented episodes was 58.8% and 48.3% respectively (P = 0.45). Among the microbiologically documented infections with follow-up cultures available, 24 (92.3%) of 26 isolates from patients receiving ciprofloxacin/azlocillin were eradicated, in comparison with 19 (86.4%) of 22 in the gentamicin/azlocillin group (P = 0.65). There were five superinfections, all in the gentamicin/azlocillin group. Significant resistance to the study drugs was not seen. Of all evaluable patients, including those subsequently withdrawn because of early modification of therapy, there were 12 deaths within the study period; six (6.8%) of these occurred in 88 patients randomized to the ciprofloxacin/azlocillin group, compared with two of 80 (2.5%) in the gentamicin/azlocillin group. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated; one patient in the ciprofloxacin/azlocillin group developed convulsions, probably related to ciprofloxacin. The combination of ciprofloxacin and azlocillin is as effective as gentamicin plus azlocillin and offers a useful alternative for the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic patients.

摘要

在一项随机多中心研究中,将环丙沙星联合阿洛西林与庆大霉素联合阿洛西林用于治疗中性粒细胞减少患者的发热性发作进行了比较。在108例患者的147次可评估发作中,80例患者接受环丙沙星/阿洛西林治疗,67例患者接受庆大霉素/阿洛西林治疗。两个治疗组在年龄、基础诊断和中性粒细胞减少持续时间方面具有可比性。环丙沙星/阿洛西林组和庆大霉素/阿洛西林组分别有34例(42.5%)和29例(43.3%)发热发作是由微生物学证实的感染引起的。治疗结束时,接受环丙沙星/阿洛西林治疗的46例患者(57.5%)完全缓解,而庆大霉素/阿洛西林组为30例(44.7%)(P = 0.14)。微生物学证实发作的临床缓解率分别为58.8%和48.3%(P = 0.45)。在有后续培养结果的微生物学证实感染中,接受环丙沙星/阿洛西林治疗患者的26株分离菌中有24株(92.3%)被清除,而庆大霉素/阿洛西林组22株中有19株(86.4%)被清除(P = 0.65)。有5例二重感染,均发生在庆大霉素/阿洛西林组。未观察到对研究药物的显著耐药性。在所有可评估患者中,包括那些因早期更改治疗方案而退出的患者,研究期间有12例死亡;其中6例(6.8%)发生在随机分配至环丙沙星/阿洛西林组的88例患者中,而庆大霉素/阿洛西林组80例中有2例(2.5%)。两种治疗方法总体耐受性良好;环丙沙星/阿洛西林组有1例患者发生惊厥,可能与环丙沙星有关。环丙沙星和阿洛西林联合使用与庆大霉素加阿洛西林一样有效,为发热性中性粒细胞减少患者的经验性治疗提供了一种有用的替代方案。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验