• 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

克拉霉素与头孢克肟作为门诊治疗下呼吸道感染的疗效及安全性比较。

Efficacy and safety of clarithromycin compared to cefixime as outpatient treatment of lower respiratory tract infections.

作者信息

Neu H C, Chick T W

机构信息

Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York.

出版信息

Chest. 1993 Nov;104(5):1393-9. doi: 10.1378/chest.104.5.1393.

DOI:10.1378/chest.104.5.1393
PMID:8222794
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clarithromycin is a new acid-stable, 14-membered macrolide active against many of the organisms responsible for lower respiratory tract infections. It has been administered to over 5,000 patients worldwide and has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and bacterial pneumonia when given twice daily (250 to 500 mg). Cefixime is an amino-thiazolyl cephalosporin with an extended spectrum of antibacterial activity inhibiting beta-lactamase-producing respiratory pathogens. It has a long half-life, allowing once-daily administration.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind multicenter study compared clarithromycin and cefixime as treatment for patients with community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections (n = 213). Patients had bacterial pneumonia (clarithromycin, 19 percent; cefixime, 21 percent) or acute bacterial exacerbation of chronic bronchitis or asthmatic bronchitis (clarithromycin, 81 percent; cefixime, 79 percent). Patients received 500 mg of clarithromycin twice daily (n = 103) or 400 mg of cefixime once daily (n = 110) for 7 to 14 days.

RESULTS

Clinical cure or improvement occurred in 86 percent of the clarithromycin-treated patients and 88 percent of the cefixime-treated patients. When only patients with identified infections with Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, or Streptococcus pneumoniae were considered, clinical success rates were 97 percent for clarithromycin and 96 percent for cefixime; the rate of bacteriologic eradication was 91 percent for clarithromycin and 90 percent for cefixime. Adverse events occurred in 29 percent of the clarithromycin-treated patients and 23 percent of the cefixime-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that clarithromycin and cefixime are effective treatments for pneumonia and acute bacterial exacerbations of bronchitis of mild to moderate severity caused by the most common infecting organisms.

摘要

背景

克拉霉素是一种新型的耐酸14元大环内酯类抗生素,对许多引起下呼吸道感染的病原体具有活性。它已在全球5000多名患者中使用,并且已证明,当每日给药两次(250至500毫克)时,它是治疗慢性支气管炎急性细菌加重和细菌性肺炎的一种安全有效的方法。头孢克肟是一种氨基噻唑基头孢菌素,具有广泛的抗菌活性,可抑制产生β-内酰胺酶的呼吸道病原体。它的半衰期长,允许每日给药一次。

方法

这项随机、双盲多中心研究比较了克拉霉素和头孢克肟对社区获得性下呼吸道感染患者(n = 213)的治疗效果。患者患有细菌性肺炎(克拉霉素组19%;头孢克肟组21%)或慢性支气管炎或哮喘性支气管炎急性细菌加重(克拉霉素组81%;头孢克肟组79%)。患者接受每日两次500毫克克拉霉素治疗(n = 103)或每日一次40O毫克头孢克肟治疗(n = 110),疗程为7至14天。

结果

克拉霉素治疗组86%的患者临床治愈或改善,头孢克肟治疗组为88%。仅考虑确诊为流感嗜血杆菌、卡他莫拉菌或肺炎链球菌感染的患者时,克拉霉素的临床成功率为97%,头孢克肟为96%;细菌清除率克拉霉素为91%,头孢克肟为90%。克拉霉素治疗组29%的患者和头孢克肟治疗组23%的患者出现不良事件。

结论

本研究表明,克拉霉素和头孢克肟是治疗由最常见感染病原体引起的轻至中度肺炎和支气管炎急性细菌加重的有效方法。

相似文献

1
Efficacy and safety of clarithromycin compared to cefixime as outpatient treatment of lower respiratory tract infections.克拉霉素与头孢克肟作为门诊治疗下呼吸道感染的疗效及安全性比较。
Chest. 1993 Nov;104(5):1393-9. doi: 10.1378/chest.104.5.1393.
2
Clinical and bacteriological efficacy and safety of 5 and 7 day regimens of telithromycin once daily compared with a 10 day regimen of clarithromycin twice daily in patients with mild to moderate community-acquired pneumonia.在患有轻至中度社区获得性肺炎的患者中,与每日两次服用10天克拉霉素的方案相比,每日一次服用5天和7天泰利霉素方案的临床、细菌学疗效及安全性。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004 Aug;54(2):515-23. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh356. Epub 2004 Jul 21.
3
Comparative, multicenter studies of cefixime and amoxicillin in the treatment of respiratory tract infections.头孢克肟与阿莫西林治疗呼吸道感染的对比性多中心研究。
Am J Med. 1988 Sep 16;85(3A):6-13. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(88)90457-3.
4
Cefixime. A review of its therapeutic efficacy in lower respiratory tract infections.头孢克肟。其在下呼吸道感染中治疗效果的综述。
Drugs. 1995 Jun;49(6):1007-22. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199549060-00010.
5
Clarithromycin. A review of its efficacy in the treatment of respiratory tract infections in immunocompetent patients.克拉霉素。免疫功能正常患者呼吸道感染治疗中其疗效的综述。
Drugs. 1997 Jun;53(6):973-1004. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199753060-00006.
6
Cefixime in the treatment of patients with lower respiratory tract infections: results of US clinical trials.头孢克肟治疗下呼吸道感染患者:美国临床试验结果
Clin Ther. 1996 May-Jun;18(3):373-90; discussion 372. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(96)80019-1.
7
Clarithromycin extended-release tablet: a review of its use in the management of respiratory tract infections.克拉霉素缓释片:用于呼吸道感染管理的综述
Am J Respir Med. 2003;2(2):175-201. doi: 10.1007/BF03256648.
8
Efficacy and tolerability of once-daily oral telithromycin compared with clarithromycin for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in adults.与克拉霉素相比,每日一次口服泰利霉素治疗成人社区获得性肺炎的疗效和耐受性。
Clin Ther. 2004 Jan;26(1):48-62. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(04)90005-7.
9
Cefixime versus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in lower respiratory tract infections.头孢克肟与阿莫西林/克拉维酸治疗下呼吸道感染的对比
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1989 Jan;27(1):30-3.
10
The efficacy of cefditoren pivoxil in the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections, with a focus on the per-pathogen bacteriologic response in infections caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae: a pooled analysis of seven clinical trials.头孢托仑匹酯治疗下呼吸道感染的疗效,重点关注肺炎链球菌和流感嗜血杆菌所致感染中按病原体的细菌学反应:七项临床试验的汇总分析
Clin Ther. 2006 Dec;28(12):2061-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.12.010.

引用本文的文献

1
Antibiotics for community-acquired pneumonia in adult outpatients.用于成人门诊社区获得性肺炎的抗生素
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 9;2014(10):CD002109. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002109.pub4.
2
Efficacy of concomitant administration of clarithromycin and acetylcysteine in bronchiolitis obliterans in seventeen sulfur mustard-exposed patients: An open-label study.17例芥子气暴露患者中克拉霉素与乙酰半胱氨酸联合应用治疗闭塞性细支气管炎的疗效:一项开放标签研究。
Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2004 Nov;65(6):495-504. doi: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2004.12.001.
3
Efficacy and Tolerability of 5- vs 10-Day Cefixime Therapy in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Bronchitis.
头孢克肟 5 天与 10 天疗法治疗慢性支气管炎急性加重期的疗效和耐受性。
Clin Drug Investig. 1998;15(1):13-20. doi: 10.2165/00044011-199815010-00002.
4
Macrolides: A Canadian Infectious Disease Society position paper.大环内酯类药物:加拿大传染病协会立场文件。
Can J Infect Dis. 2001 Jul;12(4):218-31. doi: 10.1155/2001/657353.
5
Comparison of Clarithromycin and Amoxicillin/Clavulanic Acid for Community-Acquired Pneumonia in an Era of Drug-Resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae.比较耐药肺炎链球菌流行时期的克拉霉素和阿莫西林/克拉维酸治疗社区获得性肺炎的效果。
Clin Drug Investig. 2003;23(8):491-501. doi: 10.2165/00044011-200323080-00001.
6
Airway infection.气道感染
Infect Dis Clin North Am. 1998 Sep;12(3):671-88. doi: 10.1016/s0891-5520(05)70204-x.
7
Randomized comparison of once-daily ceftibuten and twice-daily clarithromycin in the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis.每日一次头孢布烯与每日两次克拉霉素治疗慢性支气管炎急性加重的随机对照研究
Infection. 1998 Jan-Feb;26(1):68-75. doi: 10.1007/BF02768764.
8
Clarithromycin versus amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1997 Nov;16(11):783-8. doi: 10.1007/BF01700406.
9
Clarithromycin. A review of its efficacy in the treatment of respiratory tract infections in immunocompetent patients.克拉霉素。免疫功能正常患者呼吸道感染治疗中其疗效的综述。
Drugs. 1997 Jun;53(6):973-1004. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199753060-00006.
10
Cefixime. A review of its therapeutic efficacy in lower respiratory tract infections.头孢克肟。其在下呼吸道感染中治疗效果的综述。
Drugs. 1995 Jun;49(6):1007-22. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199549060-00010.