Morley P A, Munot L D
Curr Med Res Opin. 1988;11(2):142-8. doi: 10.1185/03007998809110457.
Sodium fusidate ointment and mupirocin ointment were compared in 354 patients with superficial skin sepsis. The ointments were applied 3-times daily, or once daily when covered by a dressing, and the response assessed after 6 to 8 days. Both preparations proved effective clinically with 86% of patients responding. There was no difference between the two preparations in cases of primary infection (85% to both ointments), including a sub-group with impetigo (sodium fusidate 88% and mupirocin 84%), or secondary infection (sodium fusidate 81% and mupirocin 89%). Sodium fusidate ointment (98%) was significantly better (p less than 0.05) than mupirocin (82%) in patients with other superficial infections. Both ointments were equally effective in cases where Gram-positive, Gram-negative or mixed Gram-positive/Gram-negative bacteria were isolated. Adverse effects were reported in 1.0% of patients using sodium fusidate ointment and in 7.4% of patients using mupirocin ointment. The majority of complaints concerned the greasiness of mupirocin ointment.
对354例浅表皮肤脓毒症患者使用夫西地酸钠软膏和莫匹罗星软膏进行了比较。两种软膏均每日涂抹3次,若有敷料覆盖则每日涂抹1次,6至8天后评估疗效。两种制剂在临床上均证明有效,86%的患者有反应。在原发性感染病例中(两种软膏均为85%),包括脓疱病亚组(夫西地酸钠88%,莫匹罗星84%)或继发性感染(夫西地酸钠81%,莫匹罗星89%),两种制剂之间没有差异。在其他浅表感染患者中,夫西地酸钠软膏(98%)显著优于莫匹罗星(82%)(p<0.05)。在分离出革兰氏阳性、革兰氏阴性或革兰氏阳性/革兰氏阴性混合细菌的病例中,两种软膏同样有效。使用夫西地酸钠软膏的患者中有1.0%报告了不良反应,使用莫匹罗星软膏的患者中有7.4%报告了不良反应。大多数投诉涉及莫匹罗星软膏的油腻感。