Suppr超能文献

乙氧萘青霉素与氯霉素治疗伤寒的对比研究。

A comparative study of epicillin and chloramphenicol in the treatment of enteric fever.

作者信息

Hassau A, Sippel J, Farid Z, Tadros S S, Brian M

出版信息

J Int Med Res. 1977;5(2):91-5. doi: 10.1177/030006057700500203.

Abstract

One hundred patients with acute enteric fever were randomly assigned to treatment with either chloramphenicol 50 mg/kg body-weight or epicillin 1 g six hourly. Eighty-one patients had a positive blood culture for typhoid or paratyphoid bacilli and nineteen had a positive stool culture with a significant Widal titre. All fifty patients in the group treated with chloramphenicol responded, however there was one relapse with bacteraemia. In the group treated with epicillin, six from the total of fifty patients were considred treatment failures. Treatment was considred as a failure if the patient was febrile after ten days treatment or if there was a deterioration despite antibiotic therapy.

摘要

100例急性肠热症患者被随机分配接受以下治疗:氯霉素,50mg/千克体重;或埃比西林,每6小时1g。81例患者血培养伤寒杆菌或副伤寒杆菌呈阳性,19例患者粪便培养呈阳性且肥达氏反应效价显著。接受氯霉素治疗的50例患者均有反应,但有1例出现菌血症复发。在接受埃比西林治疗的组中,50例患者中有6例被视为治疗失败。如果患者在治疗10天后仍发热,或尽管进行了抗生素治疗但病情仍恶化,则治疗被视为失败。

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