Wong K S, Lim K B, Tham S N, Ling M L, Tan T
Singapore Med J. 1989 Aug;30(4):380-3.
A double-blinded study was conducted to compare the effects of mupirocin and tetracycline ointments in the treatment of skin infections. 111 patients were available for clinical assessment, of which 53 were treated with mupirocin and 58 treated with tetracycline. Clinically, both groups were improved, and there was no significant difference. Bacteriological assessment however revealed a better response to mupirocin. Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes were the most common organisms isolated. 99% of Staphylococci were sensitive to mupirocin compared with 61% to tetracycline and 29% to penicillin G. 57% of Group A beta haemolytic Streptococci were resistant to tetracycline compared to 14% to mupirocin. Gram-negative organisms were mostly resistant to both preparations. No side effects were observed in both treatment groups. This study suggests that mupirocin is a safe and effective topical preparation for treating most of our common skin infections.
进行了一项双盲研究，以比较莫匹罗星和四环素软膏治疗皮肤感染的效果。111名患者可供临床评估，其中53名接受莫匹罗星治疗，58名接受四环素治疗。临床上，两组均有改善，且无显著差异。然而，细菌学评估显示莫匹罗星的反应更好。金黄色葡萄球菌和化脓性链球菌是最常见的分离出的微生物。99%的葡萄球菌对莫匹罗星敏感，相比之下，对四环素敏感的为61%，对青霉素G敏感的为29%。A组β溶血性链球菌中57%对四环素耐药，而对莫匹罗星耐药的为14%。革兰氏阴性菌大多对两种制剂均耐药。两个治疗组均未观察到副作用。这项研究表明，莫匹罗星是一种安全有效的局部制剂，可用于治疗大多数常见的皮肤感染。
