Suppr超能文献

氯霉素、氨苄青霉素和复方新诺明治疗伤寒的疗效比较

Comparative efficacy of chloramphenicol, ampicillin, and co-trimoxazole in the treatment of typhoid fever.

作者信息

Snyder M J, Gonzalez O, Palomino C, Music S I, Hornick R B, Perroni J, Woodward W E, Gonzalez C, DuPont H L, Woodward T E

出版信息

Lancet. 1976 Nov 27;2(7996):1155-7. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(76)91678-0.

Abstract

Two clinical trials were conducted to compare the efficacy of 3 antimicrobial agents often recommended for the treatment of typhoid fever. Chloramphenicol was more effective than parenteral ampicillin or oral co-trimoxazole (trimethaprim/sulphamethoxazole) in reducing the duration of fever. Oral chloramphenicol was more effective than parenteral chloramphenicol probably because oral doses resulted in higher blood concentrations of the drug. However, parenteral chloramphenicol was given during the initial period of acute illness, without loss of efficacy.

摘要

进行了两项临床试验,以比较3种常用于治疗伤寒热的抗菌药物的疗效。在缩短发热持续时间方面,氯霉素比注射用氨苄青霉素或口服复方新诺明(甲氧苄啶/磺胺甲恶唑)更有效。口服氯霉素比注射用氯霉素更有效,这可能是因为口服剂量使药物在血液中的浓度更高。然而,在急性疾病初期给予注射用氯霉素,并未降低疗效。

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