• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

哌拉西林-他唑巴坦联合阿米卡星与头孢哌酮-舒巴坦联合阿米卡星治疗淋巴瘤和实体瘤患儿发热性中性粒细胞减少症的随机对照研究

Randomized comparison of piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin versus cefoperazone-sulbactam plus amikacin for management of febrile neutropenia in children with lymphoma and solid tumors.

作者信息

Demirkaya Metin, Celebi Solmaz, Sevinir Betül, Hacımustafaoglu Mustafa

机构信息

Division of Pediatric Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Medical Faculty, Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey.

出版信息

Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2013 Mar;30(2):141-8. doi: 10.3109/08880018.2012.756565. Epub 2013 Jan 9.

DOI:10.3109/08880018.2012.756565
PMID:23301757
Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of piperacillin-tazobactam (PIP/TAZO) plus amikacin (AMK) (PIP/TAZO+AMK) versus cefoperazone-sulbactam (CS) plus AMK (CS+AMK) for the treatment of febrile neutropenia (FN) in children with cancer. The study was designed prospectively and randomized in 0- to 18-year-old children with lymphoma or solid tumor who were hospitalized with FN diagnosis. Consecutively randomized patients received either PIP/TAZO 360 mg/kg/day in 4 doses plus AMK 15 mg/kg/day in 3 doses or CS 100 mg/kg/day in 3 doses plus AMK 15 mg/kg/day in 3 doses intravenously. Treatment modification was defined as any change in the initial empirical antibiotic therapy. A total of 116 FN episodes were managed in 46 patients (26 boys and 20 girls) with a median age of 6.5 years (range .8-17.0) during the study period. Success rates without modification of therapy were 47.5% and 52.6% in PIP/TAZO+AMK group and CS+AMK group, respectively (P >.05). No statistical difference was found between treatment groups in terms of durations of neutropenia, fever, and hospitalization. The overall success rate in all groups was 97.4%. No major side effect was observed in either group during the course of the study. Our study is the first to compare the effectiveness of PIP/TAZO+AMK and CS+AMK therapies. Both combinations were effective and safe as empirical therapy for febrile neutropenic patients.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较哌拉西林-他唑巴坦(PIP/TAZO)联合阿米卡星(AMK)(PIP/TAZO+AMK)与头孢哌酮-舒巴坦(CS)联合AMK(CS+AMK)治疗儿童癌症患者发热性中性粒细胞减少症(FN)的有效性。本研究为前瞻性设计,对0至18岁诊断为FN并因淋巴瘤或实体瘤住院的儿童进行随机分组。连续随机分组的患者接受静脉注射,一组为PIP/TAZO 360mg/kg/天,分4剂,加AMK 15mg/kg/天,分3剂;另一组为CS 100mg/kg/天,分3剂,加AMK 15mg/kg/天,分3剂。治疗调整定义为初始经验性抗生素治疗的任何改变。在研究期间,46例患者(26例男孩和20例女孩)共发生116次FN发作,中位年龄为6.5岁(范围0.8 - 十七.0岁)。PIP/TAZO+AMK组和CS+AMK组未经治疗调整的成功率分别为47.5%和52.6%(P>0.05)。治疗组之间在中性粒细胞减少、发热和住院时间方面未发现统计学差异。所有组的总体成功率为97.4%。在研究过程中,两组均未观察到重大副作用。我们的研究是首次比较PIP/TAZO+AMK和CS+AMK疗法的有效性。两种联合用药作为发热性中性粒细胞减少患者的经验性治疗均有效且安全。

相似文献

1
Randomized comparison of piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin versus cefoperazone-sulbactam plus amikacin for management of febrile neutropenia in children with lymphoma and solid tumors.哌拉西林-他唑巴坦联合阿米卡星与头孢哌酮-舒巴坦联合阿米卡星治疗淋巴瘤和实体瘤患儿发热性中性粒细胞减少症的随机对照研究
Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2013 Mar;30(2):141-8. doi: 10.3109/08880018.2012.756565. Epub 2013 Jan 9.
2
Comparison of piperacillin tazobactam and cefoperazone sulbactam monotherapy in treatment of febrile neutropenia.哌拉西林他唑巴坦与头孢哌酮舒巴坦单药治疗发热性中性粒细胞减少症的比较。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012 Apr;58(4):579-83. doi: 10.1002/pbc.23245. Epub 2011 Jun 14.
3
Piperacillin/tazobactam monotherapy versus piperacillin/tazobactam plus amikacin as initial empirical therapy for febrile neutropenia in children with acute leukemia.哌拉西林/他唑巴坦单药治疗与哌拉西林/他唑巴坦联合阿米卡星作为急性白血病患儿发热性中性粒细胞减少症初始经验性治疗的比较
Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2011 May;28(4):311-20. doi: 10.3109/08880018.2011.557144.
4
Meropenem plus amikacin versus piperacillin-tazobactam plus netilmicin as empiric therapy for high-risk febrile neutropenia in children.美罗培南联合阿米卡星与哌拉西林-他唑巴坦联合奈替米星作为儿童高危发热性中性粒细胞减少症的经验性治疗
Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2004 Mar;21(2):115-23. doi: 10.1080/08880010490277321.
5
Piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin as an initial empirical therapy of febrile neutropenia in paediatric cancer patients.哌拉西林-他唑巴坦联合阿米卡星作为儿童癌症患者发热性中性粒细胞减少症的初始经验性治疗方案。
Singapore Med J. 2008 Jan;49(1):26-30.
6
Piperacillin-tazobactam versus carbapenem therapy with and without amikacin as empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients: results of an open randomized trial at a university hospital.哌拉西林他唑巴坦与碳青霉烯类药物联合或不联合阿米卡星作为癌症发热性中性粒细胞减少症患者的经验性治疗:一项在大学医院进行的开放性随机试验结果。
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug;40(8):761-7. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyq046. Epub 2010 Apr 28.
7
Monotherapy with piperacillin/tazobactam versus combination therapy with ceftazidime plus amikacin as an empiric therapy for fever in neutropenic cancer patients.哌拉西林/他唑巴坦单药治疗与头孢他啶加阿米卡星联合治疗作为中性粒细胞减少癌症患者发热的经验性治疗。
Support Care Cancer. 1998 Jul;6(4):402-9. doi: 10.1007/s005200050184.
8
Piperacillin/tazobactam plus ceftazidime versus sulbactam/ampicillin plus aztreonam as empirical therapy for fever in severely neutropenic pediatric patients.哌拉西林/他唑巴坦联合头孢他啶与舒巴坦/氨苄西林联合氨曲南作为重度中性粒细胞减少儿科患者发热的经验性治疗方案比较
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2009 Apr;31(4):270-3. doi: 10.1097/MPH.0b013e31819daf4a.
9
Piperacillin/tazobactam versus cefepime for the empirical treatment of pediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and fever: a randomized and open-label study.哌拉西林/他唑巴坦与头孢吡肟用于经验性治疗儿童癌症中性粒细胞减少症伴发热患者:一项随机开放标签研究。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2009 Oct;53(4):610-4. doi: 10.1002/pbc.22100.
10
Piperacillin/tazobactam plus amikacin versus carbapenem monotherapy as empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in childhood hematological malignancies.哌拉西林/他唑巴坦联合阿米卡星与碳青霉烯类单药治疗儿童血液系统恶性肿瘤发热性中性粒细胞减少症的经验性治疗比较
Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2008 Jun;25(4):291-9. doi: 10.1080/08880010802016847.

引用本文的文献

1
Efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam in empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia: A systemic review and meta-analysis.头孢哌酮-舒巴坦在发热性中性粒细胞减少症经验性治疗中的疗效与安全性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Feb;99(8):e19321. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019321.