Phadtare J M, Rangnekar R Y
Department of Tuberculosis and Chest Diseases, Grant Medical College, G.T. Hospital, Bombay, India.
Pharmatherapeutica. 1988;5(3):183-8.
An open, randomized trial was carried out in 50 patients with severe respiratory tract infections due to various pathogens to compare the effectiveness and tolerability of co-trimoxazole and cephalexin. Patients were divided into two groups, each of 25, and treated for 15 days with either 1 tablet of co-trimoxazole (160 mg trimethoprim plus 800 mg sulphamethoxazole) every 12 hours or 1 capsule of cephalexin (500 mg) every 6 hours. The results of bacteriological and radiological investigations before and after 10 and 15 days of treatment showed that, although response to cephalexin was somewhat faster, both drugs were equally effective and well-tolerated over the full treatment period and there was good correlation between the laboratory findings as well as clinical improvement in symptoms. Taking the cost-benefit ratio into consideration, it is suggested that co-trimoxazole should be used for first-line therapy in respiratory tract infections and cephalexin only as a reserve drug for infections which do not respond to the routine use of co-trimoxazole.
对50例因各种病原体导致严重呼吸道感染的患者进行了一项开放性随机试验,以比较复方新诺明和头孢氨苄的有效性和耐受性。患者被分为两组,每组25人,分别接受为期15天的治疗,一组每12小时服用1片复方新诺明(160毫克甲氧苄啶加800毫克磺胺甲恶唑),另一组每6小时服用1粒头孢氨苄胶囊(500毫克)。治疗10天和15天前后的细菌学和放射学检查结果表明,虽然头孢氨苄的反应稍快一些,但在整个治疗期间两种药物的疗效相同且耐受性良好,实验室检查结果与症状的临床改善之间存在良好的相关性。考虑到成本效益比,建议复方新诺明应用于呼吸道感染的一线治疗,而头孢氨苄仅作为对常规使用复方新诺明无反应的感染的备用药物。