• 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

替考拉宁静脉注射、替考拉宁肌肉注射及头孢唑林治疗革兰氏阳性菌引起的皮肤和软组织感染的随机对照试验。

Randomized comparison trial of teicoplanin i.v., teicoplanin i.m., and cefazolin therapy for skin and soft tissue infections caused by gram-positive bacteria.

作者信息

Chirurgi V A, Edelstein H, Oster S E, Karp R, Cassano K B, Aiken S, McCabe R E

机构信息

Medical Service, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Martinez, CA 94553.

出版信息

South Med J. 1994 Sep;87(9):875-80. doi: 10.1097/00007611-199409000-00002.

DOI:10.1097/00007611-199409000-00002
PMID:8091249
Abstract

Teicoplanin, a glycopeptide antibiotic chemically related to the vancomycin-ristocetin group of antibiotics, has potent activity against aerobic and anaerobic gram-positive bacteria. In this study, we examined the efficacy and safety of teicoplanin for parenteral treatment of skin and soft tissue infections caused by gram-positive bacteria. Ninety-six hospitalized adults with moderate to severe skin and soft tissue infections were randomized to receive either teicoplanin intravenously (i.v.) once a day, teicoplanin intramuscularly (i.m.) once a day, or cefazolin i.v. every 8 hours. We evaluated patients' clinical and microbiologic status and assessed clinical and laboratory adverse events. Of 76 clinically assessable patients, 26 of 26 (100%) given teicoplanin i.v., 21 of 22 (95%) given teicoplanin i.m., and 26 of 28 (93%) given cefazolin showed improvement or cure. Of 60 microbiologically assessable patients, 22 of 22 (100%) given teicoplanin i.v., 16 of 18 (89%) given teicoplanin i.m, and 18 of 20 (90%) given cefazolin were cured. Of 96 patients assessable for adverse events, 7 of 34 (21%) given teicoplanin i.v., 4 of 31 (13%) give teicoplanin i.m., and 1 of 31 (3%) given cefazolin had adverse events. In this study, once daily teicoplanin appeared to be safe and effective therapy for skin and soft tissue infections.

摘要

替考拉宁是一种糖肽类抗生素,在化学结构上与万古霉素-利托菌素类抗生素相关,对需氧和厌氧革兰氏阳性菌具有强大活性。在本研究中,我们考察了替考拉宁用于胃肠外治疗革兰氏阳性菌引起的皮肤和软组织感染的有效性和安全性。96例患有中重度皮肤和软组织感染的住院成人被随机分为三组,分别接受每日一次静脉注射替考拉宁、每日一次肌肉注射替考拉宁或每8小时静脉注射头孢唑林。我们评估了患者的临床和微生物学状况,并评估了临床和实验室不良事件。在76例可进行临床评估的患者中,26例(100%)接受静脉注射替考拉宁、22例中的21例(95%)接受肌肉注射替考拉宁以及28例中的26例(93%)接受头孢唑林治疗的患者病情有所改善或治愈。在60例可进行微生物学评估的患者中,22例(100%)接受静脉注射替考拉宁、18例中的16例(89%)接受肌肉注射替考拉宁以及20例中的18例(90%)接受头孢唑林治疗的患者被治愈。在96例可评估不良事件的患者中,34例接受静脉注射替考拉宁的患者中有7例(21%)、31例接受肌肉注射替考拉宁的患者中有4例(13%)以及31例接受头孢唑林的患者中有1例(3%)出现了不良事件。在本研究中,每日一次使用替考拉宁似乎是治疗皮肤和软组织感染的安全有效的疗法。

相似文献

1
Randomized comparison trial of teicoplanin i.v., teicoplanin i.m., and cefazolin therapy for skin and soft tissue infections caused by gram-positive bacteria.替考拉宁静脉注射、替考拉宁肌肉注射及头孢唑林治疗革兰氏阳性菌引起的皮肤和软组织感染的随机对照试验。
South Med J. 1994 Sep;87(9):875-80. doi: 10.1097/00007611-199409000-00002.
2
Intravenous or intramuscular teicoplanin once daily for skin and soft-tissue infections.用于皮肤和软组织感染时,替考拉宁每日一次静脉注射或肌肉注射。
DICP. 1991 Sep;25(9):914-8. doi: 10.1177/106002809102500901.
3
Teicoplanin for skin and soft tissue infections: An open study and a randomized, comparative trial versus cefazolin.替考拉宁治疗皮肤和软组织感染:一项开放性研究以及与头孢唑林对比的随机对照试验。
J Infect Chemother. 1999 Mar;5(1):40-45. doi: 10.1007/s101560050006.
4
Treatment of hospitalized patients with complicated gram-positive skin and skin structure infections: two randomized, multicentre studies of quinupristin/dalfopristin versus cefazolin, oxacillin or vancomycin. Synercid Skin and Skin Structure Infection Group.住院的复杂性革兰氏阳性皮肤及皮肤结构感染患者的治疗:两项关于奎奴普丁/达福普汀对比头孢唑林、苯唑西林或万古霉素的随机、多中心研究。链阳霉素皮肤及皮肤结构感染研究组。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1999 Aug;44(2):263-73. doi: 10.1093/jac/44.2.263.
5
Teicoplanin.
Med Clin North Am. 1995 Jul;79(4):833-44. doi: 10.1016/s0025-7125(16)30042-6.
6
Linezolid versus teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections in the critically ill: a randomized, double-blind, multicentre study.利奈唑胺与替考拉宁治疗重症患者革兰氏阳性菌感染的随机、双盲、多中心研究。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004 Feb;53(2):345-55. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh048. Epub 2004 Jan 7.
7
Teicoplanin in the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections: results of a multicentre study.替考拉宁治疗皮肤及软组织感染:一项多中心研究结果
Infection. 1991 May-Jun;19(3):190-4. doi: 10.1007/BF01643252.
8
Comparative efficacy of teicoplanin and cefazolin for cardiac operation prophylaxis in 3027 patients. The ESPRIT Group.替考拉宁与头孢唑林预防3027例心脏手术感染的疗效比较。ESPRIT研究组。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000 Dec;120(6):1120-30. doi: 10.1067/mtc.2000.110384.
9
Comparative multicenter trial of teicoplanin versus cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery. Italian Study Group for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Orthopedic Surgery.替考拉宁与头孢唑林在人工关节置换手术中预防感染的多中心对照试验。意大利骨外科抗菌预防研究组。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1999 Feb;18(2):113-9. doi: 10.1007/s100960050238.
10
Linezolid compared with teicoplanin for the treatment of suspected or proven Gram-positive infections.利奈唑胺与替考拉宁治疗疑似或确诊革兰氏阳性菌感染的比较。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004 Feb;53(2):335-44. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh088. Epub 2004 Jan 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Interventions for cellulitis and erysipelas.蜂窝织炎和丹毒的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jun 16;2010(6):CD004299. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004299.pub2.