• 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

每日两次1克头孢曲松与每日一次2克头孢曲松治疗吸入性肺炎的有效性和安全性的回顾性比较

Retrospective Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Ceftriaxone 1 g Twice Daily versus 2 g Once Daily for Treatment of Aspiration Pneumonia.

作者信息

Kato Hideo, Hagihara Mao, Morikawa Yoshihiko, Asai Nobuhiro, Mikamo Hiroshige, Iwamoto Takuya

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Mie University Hospital, Tsu 514-8507, Japan.

Department of Clinical Pharmaceutics, Division of Clinical Medical Science, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Tsu 514-8507, Japan.

出版信息

Antibiotics (Basel). 2022 Jul 22;11(8):983. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics11080983.

DOI:10.3390/antibiotics11080983
PMID:35892373
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9331887/
Abstract

Although a 2 g once daily administration of ceftriaxone remains the standard dosing regimen for the treatment of aspiration pneumonia, there are no studies to investigate the optimal dosing method. Hence, we retrospectively evaluated the effectiveness and safety of 1 g twice daily versus 2 g once daily administration of ceftriaxone in adult patients with aspiration pneumonia. Patients who received ceftriaxone for the treatment of aspiration pneumonia between 2015 and 2021 were included in this study. Clinical responses, inflammatory markers, and incidence of adverse events after completion of ceftriaxone therapy were investigated. In total, 33 patients received 1 g twice daily (group 1) and 28 received 2 g once daily (group 2) ceftriaxone for the treatment of mild-to-moderate aspiration pneumonia. Compared with that of group 1, group 2 demonstrated significantly improved clinical responses (group 1 vs. group 2, 84.8% vs. 100%, = 0.0316). Although the safety profile was not significantly different between the two groups, the incidence of choleliths during ceftriaxone therapy in group 1 was higher than that in group 2 (31.3% vs. 9.1%, = 0.174). Therefore, a 2 g once daily administration of ceftriaxone appeared to be a simple regimen adequate for the treatment of inpatients with mild-to-moderate aspiration pneumonia, which might not be heavily involved by anaerobes.

摘要

尽管每日一次给予2克头孢曲松仍然是治疗吸入性肺炎的标准给药方案,但尚无研究探讨最佳给药方法。因此,我们回顾性评估了每日两次给予1克与每日一次给予2克头孢曲松治疗成人吸入性肺炎的有效性和安全性。本研究纳入了2015年至2021年间接受头孢曲松治疗吸入性肺炎的患者。研究了头孢曲松治疗结束后的临床反应、炎症标志物和不良事件发生率。共有33例患者接受每日两次1克(第1组)和28例接受每日一次2克(第2组)头孢曲松治疗轻度至中度吸入性肺炎。与第1组相比,第2组的临床反应显著改善(第1组与第2组,84.8%对100%,P = 0.0316)。虽然两组的安全性概况无显著差异,但第1组头孢曲松治疗期间胆结石的发生率高于第2组(31.3%对9.1%,P = 0.174)。因此,每日一次给予2克头孢曲松似乎是一种简单的方案,足以治疗轻度至中度吸入性肺炎的住院患者,这类患者可能未受到厌氧菌的严重影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6469/9331887/6e91c230dc68/antibiotics-11-00983-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6469/9331887/6e91c230dc68/antibiotics-11-00983-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6469/9331887/6e91c230dc68/antibiotics-11-00983-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Retrospective Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Ceftriaxone 1 g Twice Daily versus 2 g Once Daily for Treatment of Aspiration Pneumonia.每日两次1克头孢曲松与每日一次2克头孢曲松治疗吸入性肺炎的有效性和安全性的回顾性比较
Antibiotics (Basel). 2022 Jul 22;11(8):983. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics11080983.
2
Evaluating the antimicrobial efficacy of ceftriaxone regimens: 1 g twice daily versus 2 g once daily in a murine model of pneumonia.评估头孢曲松治疗方案的抗菌效果:在小鼠肺炎模型中每日两次1g与每日一次2g的对比
JAC Antimicrob Resist. 2024 Jun 4;6(3):dlae092. doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlae092. eCollection 2024 Jun.
3
Linezolid versus ceftriaxone/cefpodoxime in patients hospitalized for the treatment of Streptococcus pneumoniae pneumonia.利奈唑胺与头孢曲松/头孢泊肟用于住院治疗肺炎链球菌肺炎患者的比较。
Scand J Infect Dis. 2002;34(10):720-8. doi: 10.1080/0036554021000026933.
4
A multicenter, randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of intravenous and/or oral levofloxacin versus ceftriaxone and/or cefuroxime axetil in treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia.一项多中心随机研究,比较静脉注射和/或口服左氧氟沙星与头孢曲松和/或头孢呋辛酯治疗成人社区获得性肺炎的疗效和安全性。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997 Sep;41(9):1965-72. doi: 10.1128/AAC.41.9.1965.
5
Oral gemifloxacin versus sequential therapy with intravenous ceftriaxone/oral cefuroxime with or without a macrolide in the treatment of patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: a randomized, open-label, multicenter study of clinical efficacy and tolerability.口服吉米沙星与静脉注射头孢曲松/口服头孢呋辛序贯治疗(联合或不联合大环内酯类药物)在社区获得性肺炎住院患者治疗中的应用:一项关于临床疗效和耐受性的随机、开放标签、多中心研究
Clin Ther. 2002 Nov;24(11):1915-36. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(02)80088-1.
6
A randomised, multicentre study of ceftriaxone versus standard therapy in the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections.一项关于头孢曲松与标准疗法治疗下呼吸道感染的随机多中心研究。
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 1999 Jul;12(2):121-7. doi: 10.1016/s0924-8579(99)00037-0.
7
Cefotaxime. A pharmacoeconomic review of its use in the treatment of infections.头孢噻肟。对其用于治疗感染的药物经济学综述。
Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 Jan;13(1 Pt 1):91-106. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199813010-00009.
8
A prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter comparison of parenteral ertapenem and ceftriaxone for the treatment of hospitalized adults with community-acquired pneumonia.一项关于静脉注射厄他培南与头孢曲松治疗社区获得性肺炎住院成人患者的前瞻性、随机、双盲多中心比较研究。
Clin Ther. 2002 Nov;24(11):1770-85. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(02)80078-9.
9
Levofloxacin Versus Ceftriaxone and Azithromycin Combination in the Treatment of Community Acquired Pneumonia in Hospitalized Patients.左氧氟沙星与头孢曲松和阿奇霉素联合用药治疗住院患者社区获得性肺炎的疗效比较
Recent Pat Antiinfect Drug Discov. 2018;13(3):228-239. doi: 10.2174/1574891X13666181024154526.
10
Ertapenem therapy for community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly.厄他培南治疗老年社区获得性肺炎
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Nov;51(11):1526-32. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51507.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of one dose of ceftriaxone during endotracheal intubation on the incidence of aspiration pneumonia in cerebral hemorrhage patients: A randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical study protocol.脑出血患者气管插管时一剂头孢曲松对吸入性肺炎发生率的影响:一项随机、对照、双盲临床研究方案。
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 14;20(1):e0316811. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316811. eCollection 2025.
2
Antibiotic therapy for bacterial pneumonia.细菌性肺炎的抗生素治疗。
J Pharm Health Care Sci. 2024 Jul 30;10(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s40780-024-00367-5.
3
Evaluating the antimicrobial efficacy of ceftriaxone regimens: 1 g twice daily versus 2 g once daily in a murine model of pneumonia.

本文引用的文献

1
Pharmacodynamics of ceftriaxone for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: is it a viable treatment option?头孢曲松治疗耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌的药效学:这是一种可行的治疗选择吗?
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2022 Mar;59(3):106537. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106537. Epub 2022 Jan 31.
2
Ampicillin Plus Ceftriaxone Regimen against Endocarditis: A Literature Review.氨苄西林联合头孢曲松治疗心内膜炎的方案:文献综述
J Clin Med. 2021 Oct 6;10(19):4594. doi: 10.3390/jcm10194594.
3
Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Total and Free Ceftriaxone in Critically Ill Children and Young Adults and Monte Carlo Simulations Support Twice Daily Dosing for Target Attainment.
评估头孢曲松治疗方案的抗菌效果:在小鼠肺炎模型中每日两次1g与每日一次2g的对比
JAC Antimicrob Resist. 2024 Jun 4;6(3):dlae092. doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlae092. eCollection 2024 Jun.
4
Comparison between Ceftriaxone and Sulbactam-Ampicillin as Initial Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.头孢曲松与舒巴坦-氨苄西林作为社区获得性肺炎初始治疗的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Antibiotics (Basel). 2022 Sep 22;11(10):1291. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics11101291.
危重症儿童和青年中头孢曲松总药量和游离药量的群体药代动力学建模及蒙特卡洛模拟支持每日两次给药以达到目标浓度
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2022 Jan 18;66(1):e0142721. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01427-21. Epub 2021 Oct 11.
4
Appropriate Use of Ceftriaxone in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review.头孢曲松在撒哈拉以南非洲地区的合理使用:一项系统评价。
Infect Drug Resist. 2021 Aug 28;14:3477-3484. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S329996. eCollection 2021.
5
Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Target Attainment Based on Measured versus Predicted Unbound Ceftriaxone Concentrations in Critically Ill Patients with Pneumonia: An Observational Cohort Study.基于实测与预测的未结合头孢曲松浓度的药代动力学/药效学靶点达成情况:一项针对重症肺炎患者的观察性队列研究
Antibiotics (Basel). 2021 May 11;10(5):557. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10050557.
6
Comparing probability of target attainment against Staphylococcus aureus for ceftaroline fosamil, vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid, and ceftriaxone in complicated skin and soft tissue infection using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models.比较应用药代动力学/药效学模型的头孢洛林酯、万古霉素、达托霉素、利奈唑胺和头孢曲松治疗复杂性皮肤和软组织感染时针对金黄色葡萄球菌的达标概率。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021 Apr;99(4):115292. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2020.115292. Epub 2020 Dec 13.
7
Ceftriaxone dosing in patients admitted from the emergency department with sepsis.急诊脓毒症患者的头孢曲松剂量。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2021 Feb;77(2):207-214. doi: 10.1007/s00228-020-03001-z. Epub 2020 Sep 24.
8
Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic comparison of ceftriaxone regimens in acute cholangitis.头孢曲松方案在急性胆管炎中的药代动力学-药效学比较。
J Infect Chemother. 2019 Oct;25(10):780-785. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2019.04.006. Epub 2019 May 24.
9
Aspiration Pneumonia.吸入性肺炎
N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 14;380(7):651-663. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1714562.
10
Determining the Possible Etiology of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia Using a Clone Library Analysis in Japan.利用克隆文库分析确定日本医院获得性肺炎的可能病因
Tohoku J Exp Med. 2017 May;242(1):9-17. doi: 10.1620/tjem.242.9.