• 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

Ceftazidime monotherapy vs. ceftriaxone/tobramycin for serious hospital-acquired gram-negative infections. Antibiotic Study Group.

作者信息

Rubinstein E, Lode H, Grassi C

机构信息

Infectious Diseases Unit, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Hashomer, Israel.

出版信息

Clin Infect Dis. 1995 May;20(5):1217-28. doi: 10.1093/clinids/20.5.1217.

DOI:10.1093/clinids/20.5.1217
PMID:7620002
Abstract

We compared ceftazidime monotherapy with ceftriaxone/tobramycin in a prospective, randomized clinical trial that included 580 patients with serious hospital-acquired infections. One-half of the patients had an underlying disease with a rapidly or ultimately fatal prognosis; 40% were nursed in intensive care units. Clinical response among patients with pneumonia (73% in the ceftazidime group vs. 65% in the ceftriaxone/tobramycin group), septicemia (73% vs. 59%), and complicated urinary tract infections (80% vs. 76%) showed that there were no significant differences in efficacy between the two regimens. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most prevalent pathogen and was effectively eradicated by both treatments. The odds of bacteriologic cure with either study regimen were equal. Mortality was similar in both treatment groups. Ceftazidime monotherapy was not associated with a higher incidence of development of resistance or superinfection. Both regimens were well tolerated; no patients receiving ceftazidime evidenced nephrotoxicity, compared with nine who received the combination. We conclude that ceftazidime may be used as monotherapy in the empirical treatment of patients with serious nosocomial infections.

摘要

相似文献

1
Ceftazidime monotherapy vs. ceftriaxone/tobramycin for serious hospital-acquired gram-negative infections. Antibiotic Study Group.
Clin Infect Dis. 1995 May;20(5):1217-28. doi: 10.1093/clinids/20.5.1217.
2
Empiric treatment of hospital-acquired lower respiratory tract infections with meropenem or ceftazidime with tobramycin: a randomized study. Meropenem Lower Respiratory Infection Group.美罗培南或头孢他啶联合妥布霉素经验性治疗医院获得性下呼吸道感染:一项随机研究。美罗培南下呼吸道感染组。
Crit Care Med. 1997 Oct;25(10):1663-70. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199710000-00015.
3
Piperacillin/tazobactam plus tobramycin versus ceftazidime plus tobramycin for the treatment of patients with nosocomial lower respiratory tract infection. Piperacillin/tazobactam Nosocomial Pneumonia Study Group.哌拉西林/他唑巴坦联合妥布霉素与头孢他啶联合妥布霉素治疗医院获得性下呼吸道感染患者的疗效比较。哌拉西林/他唑巴坦医院获得性肺炎研究组。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1999 Mar;43(3):389-97. doi: 10.1093/jac/43.3.389.
4
Comparative efficacy of ceftriaxone versus ceftazidime in the treatment of nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections.
Chemotherapy. 1991;37(5):371-5. doi: 10.1159/000238881.
5
Ceftazidime compared with piperacillin and tobramycin for the empiric treatment of fever in neutropenic patients with cancer. A multicenter randomized trial. The Intercontinental Antimicrobial Study Group.头孢他啶与哌拉西林和妥布霉素用于癌症中性粒细胞减少患者发热的经验性治疗比较。一项多中心随机试验。洲际抗菌研究组。
Ann Intern Med. 1994 May 15;120(10):834-44. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-120-10-199405150-00004.
6
The efficacy and safety of isepamicin and ceftazidime compared with amikacin and ceftazidime in acute lower respiratory tract infection.异帕米星与头孢他啶联用对比阿米卡星与头孢他啶联用在急性下呼吸道感染中的疗效及安全性
J Chemother. 1995 Jun;7 Suppl 2:129-35.
7
Efficacy of the combination of levofloxacin plus ceftazidime in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia in the intensive care unit.左氧氟沙星联合头孢他啶治疗重症监护病房医院获得性肺炎的疗效
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2006 Dec;28(6):582-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2006.08.006. Epub 2006 Sep 18.
8
[Assessment of the efficacy of treating infections in hematopoietic proliferative diseases: Monotherapy with ceftazidime and tobramycin combined with amoxycillin/ampicillin].
Pol Tyg Lek. 1990;45(21-22):417-20.
9
Ceftazidime vs. tobramycin for serious infections in urological patients.
J Hosp Infect. 1990 Apr;15 Suppl A:69-76. doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(90)90083-z.
10
Comparison of strategies using cefpirome and ceftazidime for empiric treatment of pneumonia in intensive care patients. The Cefpirome Pneumonia Study Group.使用头孢匹罗和头孢他啶策略对重症监护患者肺炎进行经验性治疗的比较。头孢匹罗肺炎研究组。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1998 Jan;42(1):28-36. doi: 10.1128/AAC.42.1.28.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluation of Adjunctive Aminoglycoside Therapy Compared to β-Lactam Monotherapy in Critically Ill Patients with Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections.在革兰氏阴性血流感染的重症患者中,辅助性氨基糖苷类药物治疗与β-内酰胺类单药治疗的疗效比较
Antibiotics (Basel). 2025 May 13;14(5):497. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics14050497.
2
The effect of combining antibiotics on resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.联合使用抗生素对耐药性的影响:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Elife. 2024 Dec 20;13:RP93740. doi: 10.7554/eLife.93740.
3
The effect of combining antibiotics on resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
联合使用抗生素对耐药性的影响:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
medRxiv. 2024 Jun 28:2023.07.10.23292374. doi: 10.1101/2023.07.10.23292374.
4
An Evidence-Based Multidisciplinary Approach Focused at Creating Algorithms for Targeted Therapy of BSIs, cUTIs, and cIAIs Caused by in Critically Ill Adult Patients.一种基于证据的多学科方法,专注于为重症成年患者中由[病原体名称未给出]引起的血流感染、复杂性尿路感染和复杂性腹腔内感染创建靶向治疗算法。
Infect Drug Resist. 2021 Jun 30;14:2461-2498. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S314241. eCollection 2021.
5
Beta lactam antibiotic monotherapy versus beta lactam-aminoglycoside antibiotic combination therapy for sepsis.β-内酰胺类抗生素单药治疗与β-内酰胺类-氨基糖苷类抗生素联合治疗败血症的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan 7;2014(1):CD003344. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003344.pub3.
6
Combination therapy for treatment of infections with gram-negative bacteria.联合治疗用于治疗革兰氏阴性菌感染。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2012 Jul;25(3):450-70. doi: 10.1128/CMR.05041-11.
7
Evidence-based guidelines for empirical therapy of neutropenic fever in Korea.韩国中性粒细胞减少性发热的经验性治疗循证指南。
Korean J Intern Med. 2011 Jun;26(2):220-52. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2011.26.2.220. Epub 2011 Jun 1.
8
Clinical practice guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults.成人医院获得性肺炎和呼吸机相关性肺炎临床实践指南。
Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2008 Jan;19(1):19-53. doi: 10.1155/2008/593289.
9
Guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired pneumonia in the UK: report of the working party on hospital-acquired pneumonia of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.英国医院获得性肺炎管理指南:英国抗菌化疗协会医院获得性肺炎工作组报告
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008 Jul;62(1):5-34. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkn162. Epub 2008 Apr 29.
10
Beta lactam monotherapy versus beta lactam-aminoglycoside combination therapy for sepsis in immunocompetent patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.β-内酰胺类单药治疗与β-内酰胺类-氨基糖苷类联合治疗对免疫功能正常患者败血症的疗效:随机试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
BMJ. 2004 Mar 20;328(7441):668. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38028.520995.63. Epub 2004 Mar 2.