Islam A, Butler T, Kabir I, Alam N H
International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh, Dhaka.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 Aug;37(8):1572-5. doi: 10.1128/AAC.37.8.1572.
To compare the therapeutic efficacy of ceftriaxone given once daily for 5 days and chloramphenicol given four times daily for 14 days, a controlled trial was carried out with 59 patients who were culture positive for Salmonella typhi. Ceftriaxone was given to 28 patients in once-daily intravenous doses of 75 mg/kg of body weight to children and 4 g to adults for 5 days; chloramphenicol was given to 31 patients at a dosage of 60 mg/kg/day until defervescence and then at 40 mg/kg/day to complete 14 days of treatment. All Salmonella isolates were susceptible to both antibiotics. Clinical cures (defervescence without complications, no relapse, and no need for further treatment) occurred in 79% of the patients treated with ceftriaxone and 90% of those treated with chloramphenicol (P = 0.37). On the third day of treatment, blood cultures were positive for S. typhi for 60% of the patients in the chloramphenicol group and 0% of the ceftriaxone group (P = 0.001). Defervescence occurred in half the patients in both groups during the first 7 days, but on days 9 to 13 after the start of treatment, nine patients in the ceftriaxone group, compared with six patients in the chloramphenicol group, remained febrile (P = 0.4). The median hematocrit and total leukocyte counts at day 14 were significantly lower for the chloramphenicol group than those for the ceftriaxone group (P = 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively). These results indicate that the effects of therapy with ceftriaxone for typhoid fever differed from those of chloramphenicol therapy in that blood cultures became negative earlier, prolonged fever persisted in some patients, and bone marrow suppression was reduced. We conclude that a short, 5-day course of ceftriaxone is a useful alternative to conventional 14-day chloramphenicol therapy in the treatment of typhoid fever.
为比较每日一次静脉注射头孢曲松5天与每日四次口服氯霉素14天的治疗效果,对59例伤寒沙门菌培养阳性患者进行了一项对照试验。28例患者接受头孢曲松治疗,儿童每日静脉注射剂量为75mg/kg体重,成人每日4g,持续5天;31例患者接受氯霉素治疗,剂量为60mg/kg/天,直至退热,然后以40mg/kg/天完成14天治疗。所有伤寒沙门菌分离株对两种抗生素均敏感。头孢曲松治疗组79%的患者和氯霉素治疗组90%的患者获得临床治愈(退热且无并发症、无复发、无需进一步治疗)(P=0.37)。治疗第3天,氯霉素组60%的患者血培养伤寒沙门菌阳性,头孢曲松组为0%(P=0.001)。两组中均有一半患者在治疗的前7天内退热,但在治疗开始后的第9至13天,头孢曲松组有9例患者仍发热,氯霉素组有6例患者仍发热(P=0.4)。氯霉素组第14天的血细胞比容中位数和白细胞总数显著低于头孢曲松组(分别为P=0.01和P=0.02)。这些结果表明,头孢曲松治疗伤寒热的效果与氯霉素治疗不同,前者血培养转阴更早,部分患者持续发热时间延长,且骨髓抑制减轻。我们得出结论,在伤寒热的治疗中,为期5天的短疗程头孢曲松是传统14天氯霉素治疗的有效替代方案。