• 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

Ceftizoxime vs. cefotaxime--a comparative randomized multicenter study.

作者信息

Segev S, Kitzes R, Rubinstein E, Pitlik S, Samra Y, Shenkman L, Weinberg M

机构信息

Infectious Diseases Unit, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.

出版信息

Isr J Med Sci. 1988 Aug;24(8):410-4.

PMID:3045049
Abstract

One hundred and fourteen hospitalized patients with moderate or severe infections were assigned at random, in four medical centers, to receive either ceftizoxime or cefotaxime, administered intravenously in a dosage of 1 to 2 g every 8 h. Of 96 patients evaluable for efficacy, 24 (25%) had bacteremia, 46 (48%) had urinary tract infections and 9 (9%) had pneumonias. Half the patients had been treated ineffectively by other antibiotics prior to the study drug treatment. The overall clinical efficacy was 90% in both treatment groups and 83% in both groups with bacteremia. All patients with urinary tract infection were cured by both agents. Bacteriological eradication rate was 95% in both groups. Adverse reactions, though mild, were more frequent in the cefotaxime group (13.5%) than in the ceftizoxime group (6.8%); superinfection rate was higher in the ceftizoxime group. Both antibiotics were highly and equally efficacious in the therapy of severe infections in hospitalized patients.

摘要

相似文献

1
Ceftizoxime vs. cefotaxime--a comparative randomized multicenter study.
Isr J Med Sci. 1988 Aug;24(8):410-4.
2
Efficacy of ceftizoxime administered twice daily in hospitalized patients with respiratory tract infections.
Clin Ther. 1984;7(1):33-9.
3
Treatment and long-term follow-up of foot infections in patients with diabetes or ischemia: a randomized, prospective, double-blind comparison of cefoxitin and ceftizoxime.
Clin Ther. 1987;10 Suppl A:36-49.
4
Comparative efficacy and safety of ceftizoxime, cefotaxime and latamoxef in the treatment of bacterial pneumonia in high risk patients.头孢唑肟、头孢噻肟和拉氧头孢治疗高危患者细菌性肺炎的疗效和安全性比较
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Feb;19(2):239-48. doi: 10.1093/jac/19.2.239.
5
Clinical evaluation of ceftriaxone.头孢曲松的临床评估。
Clin Ther. 1984;6(5):653-61.
6
Randomized comparative trial with ceftizoxime and cefotaxime in urinary tract infections.
Int Urol Nephrol. 1985;17(3):195-202. doi: 10.1007/BF02085404.
7
Ceftizoxime in moderate-to-severe infections.头孢唑肟用于中重度感染。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1982 Nov;10 Suppl C:151-7. doi: 10.1093/jac/10.suppl_c.151.
8
Ampicillin/sulbactam compared with cefotaxime in the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections of bacterial etiology.氨苄西林/舒巴坦与头孢噻肟治疗细菌性病因的下呼吸道感染的比较。
Adv Ther. 1995 Jan-Feb;12(1):62-71.
9
Ceftizoxime treatment of cutaneous and subcutaneous tissue infections.
Clin Ther. 1984;6(5):613-9.
10
Ceftizoxime therapy of infections in hospitalized patients and comparison with cefamandole for urinary tract infections.头孢唑肟治疗住院患者感染及与头孢孟多治疗尿路感染的比较。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1982 Nov;10 Suppl C:253-60. doi: 10.1093/jac/10.suppl_c.253.

引用本文的文献

1
Ceftizoxime: a third-generation cephalosporin active against anaerobic bacteria. Committee on Antimicrobial Agents, Canadian Infectious Disease Society.头孢唑肟:一种对厌氧菌有效的第三代头孢菌素。抗菌药物委员会,加拿大传染病协会。
CMAJ. 1990 Jun 1;142(11):1209-12.