Pasiechnikov Sergii, Buchok Olexandr, Sheremeta Roman, Banyra Oleg
2nd Lviv Municipal Polyclinic, St. Paraskeva Medical Centre, Ukraine.
Infect Disord Drug Targets. 2015;15(3):163-70. doi: 10.2174/1871526515666150831144801.
Acute obstructive pyelonephritis (AOP) is a urological life-threatening inflammatory condition that initially requires immediate urinary drainage and simultaneous prescribing of highly effective targeted antibacterial treatment. The empirical antibacterial therapy is always prescribed before urine culture and susceptibility testing are done. Percutaneous nephrostomy (PNS) and ureteral stenting (US) are the two options for urinary drainage in obstructed kidneys, while fluoroquinolones and 3(rd) generation cephalosporins are the main groups of antibacterial drugs that are recommended and are available for empirical AOP therapy. In our study we aimed to compare efficacy of fluoroquinolone ciprofloxacin vs 3(rd) generation cephalosporin ceftazidime in empirical antibacterial treatment of patients with acute obstructive pyelonephritis. We also tried to analyze the impact of urinary drainage option on cure rates. 241 AOP patients were randomized into two groups: Group 1, n=124 pts in whom percutaneous nephrostomy was performed urinary drainage and Group 2, n=117 pts, in whom ureteral stenting was made. Then each abovementioned group was also randomized into equal two subgroups (ciprofloxacin vs ceftazidime) depending on the empiric antibacterial treatment which was chosen. Our results revealed that cure rates in patients treated by ceftazidime were higher than those who were treated by ciprofloxacin. At late follow-up, the clinical cure rate in PNS group treated by ceftazidime was 95.2% vs 83.6% in ciprofloxacin arm, while the microbiological cure rates were 92.9% vs 80.0% correspondingly (p<0.05). At late follow-up, the clinical cure rate in US group treated by ceftazidime was 86.4% vs 74.1% in ciprofloxacin arm while the microbiological cure rates were 82.4% vs 69.4% correspondingly (p<0.05). We also concluded that percutaneous nephrostomy ensures a better clinical cure than ureteral stenting at early and late follow-ups regardless of the drug regimes which were chosen. Thus, in our opinion, percutaneous nephrostomy combined with ceftazidime treatment can be considered as the most effective option in patients with acute obstructive pyelonephritis.
急性梗阻性肾盂肾炎(AOP)是一种危及生命的泌尿系统炎症性疾病,最初需要立即进行尿液引流,并同时开具高效的靶向抗菌治疗药物。在进行尿培养和药敏试验之前,通常会先进行经验性抗菌治疗。经皮肾造瘘术(PNS)和输尿管支架置入术(US)是梗阻性肾脏尿液引流的两种选择,而氟喹诺酮类药物和第三代头孢菌素是推荐用于AOP经验性治疗的主要抗菌药物类别。在我们的研究中,我们旨在比较氟喹诺酮类药物环丙沙星与第三代头孢菌素头孢他啶在急性梗阻性肾盂肾炎患者经验性抗菌治疗中的疗效。我们还试图分析尿液引流方式对治愈率的影响。241例AOP患者被随机分为两组:第1组,n = 124例,接受经皮肾造瘘术进行尿液引流;第2组,n = 117例,接受输尿管支架置入术。然后,根据所选的经验性抗菌治疗,上述每组又被随机分为两个相等的亚组(环丙沙星组与头孢他啶组)。我们的结果显示,接受头孢他啶治疗的患者治愈率高于接受环丙沙星治疗的患者。在后期随访中,头孢他啶治疗的PNS组临床治愈率为95.2%,而环丙沙星组为83.6%,微生物学治愈率分别为92.9%和80.0%(p<0.05)。在后期随访中,头孢他啶治疗的US组临床治愈率为86.4%,而环丙沙星组为74.1%,微生物学治愈率分别为82.4%和69.4%(p<0.05)。我们还得出结论,无论选择何种药物治疗方案,经皮肾造瘘术在早期和后期随访中都能确保比输尿管支架置入术有更好的临床治愈率。因此,我们认为,经皮肾造瘘术联合头孢他啶治疗可被视为急性梗阻性肾盂肾炎患者最有效的治疗选择。