• 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

氯碳头孢与多西环素治疗急性细菌性上颌窦炎的对比研究。斯堪的纳维亚研究小组

Loracarbef versus doxycycline in the treatment of acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis. Scandinavian Study Group.

出版信息

J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Jun;31(6):949-61. doi: 10.1093/jac/31.6.949.

DOI:10.1093/jac/31.6.949
PMID:8360132
Abstract

In a double-blind, multicentre study, 662 patients with acute maxillary sinusitis were randomly assigned to receive either loracarbef 400 mg bd (332 patients) or doxycycline, 200 mg for the first dose followed by 100 mg od, (330 patients) for ten days. One hundred and sixty-eight patients in the loracarbef group and 164 in the doxycycline group were evaluable for efficacy. Streptococcus pneumoniae and/or Haemophilus influenzae were isolated from approximately 75% of patients. The clinical response rate (cure or improvement) was significantly higher for patients receiving loracarbef (98.2%) than for those who received doxycycline (92.2%). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to bacteriological outcome, although more of the pre-treatment isolates were resistant to doxycycline (35 strains) than to loracarbef (five strains). Adverse events related to the gastrointestinal tract occurred in 11.7% and 10.6% of loracarbef- and doxycycline-treated patients respectively; therapy was terminated prematurely in ten patients in the loracarbef group and in nine in the doxycycline group. The results indicate that loracarbef is effective and safe treatment for acute maxillary sinusitis.

摘要

在一项双盲、多中心研究中,662例急性上颌窦炎患者被随机分配,分别接受氯碳头孢400毫克,每日两次(332例患者)或强力霉素治疗,首剂200毫克,随后每日100毫克(330例患者),疗程均为10天。氯碳头孢组有168例患者、强力霉素组有164例患者可进行疗效评估。约75%的患者分离出肺炎链球菌和/或流感嗜血杆菌。接受氯碳头孢治疗的患者临床有效率(治愈或改善)显著高于接受强力霉素治疗的患者(分别为98.2%和92.2%)。两组在细菌学结果方面无显著差异,尽管治疗前分离出的菌株中对强力霉素耐药的(35株)多于对氯碳头孢耐药的(5株)。氯碳头孢治疗组和强力霉素治疗组分别有11.7%和10.6%的患者发生与胃肠道相关的不良事件;氯碳头孢组有10例患者、强力霉素组有9例患者提前终止治疗。结果表明,氯碳头孢是治疗急性上颌窦炎的有效且安全的药物。

相似文献

1
Loracarbef versus doxycycline in the treatment of acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis. Scandinavian Study Group.氯碳头孢与多西环素治疗急性细菌性上颌窦炎的对比研究。斯堪的纳维亚研究小组
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Jun;31(6):949-61. doi: 10.1093/jac/31.6.949.
2
Twice-daily dosing of loracarbef 200 mg versus 400 mg in the treatment of patients with acute maxillary sinusitis.每日两次服用200毫克洛拉卡贝与400毫克洛拉卡贝治疗急性上颌窦炎患者的对比研究。
Clin Ther. 1995 Mar-Apr;17(2):214-30. doi: 10.1016/0149-2918(95)80020-4.
3
Loracarbef (LY163892) versus amoxicillin/clavulanate in the treatment of acute purulent bacterial bronchitis.氯碳头孢(LY163892)与阿莫西林/克拉维酸治疗急性化脓性细菌性支气管炎的对比研究
Clin Ther. 1992 Mar-Apr;14(2):166-77.
4
Acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis: results of U.S. and European comparative therapy trials.急性细菌性上颌窦炎:美国和欧洲对比治疗试验的结果
Am J Med. 1992 Jun 22;92(6A):70S-73S. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(92)90611-e.
5
Loracarbef (LY163892) versus amoxicillin/clavulanate in bronchopneumonia and lobar pneumonia.氯碳头孢(LY163892)与阿莫西林/克拉维酸治疗支气管肺炎和大叶性肺炎的比较
Clin Ther. 1992 Mar-Apr;14(2):254-67.
6
Loracarbef (LY163892) versus amoxicillin/clavulanate in the treatment of acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis.氯碳头孢(LY163892)与阿莫西林/克拉维酸治疗慢性支气管炎急性细菌感染的比较
Clin Ther. 1992 Mar-Apr;14(2):214-29.
7
Comparison of loracarbef (LY163892) versus amoxicillin in the treatment of bronchopneumonia and lobar pneumonia.
Infection. 1992 May-Jun;20(3):176-82. doi: 10.1007/BF01704619.
8
Loracarbef (LY163892) versus cefaclor in the treatment of acute bacterial bronchitis.氯碳头孢(LY163892)与头孢克洛治疗急性细菌性支气管炎的对比
Clin Ther. 1992 Jan-Feb;14(1):41-53.
9
Loracarbef (LY 163892) vs amoxicillin/clavulanate in bacterial maxillary sinusitis.
Ear Nose Throat J. 1992 May;71(5):225-32.
10
Penetration of loracarbef into the maxillary sinus: a pharmacokinetic assessment.氯碳头孢在上颌窦中的渗透:药代动力学评估。
Clin Ther. 1996 Mar-Apr;18(2):273-84. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(96)80008-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Economic evaluation of antibacterials in the treatment of acute sinusitis.抗菌药物治疗急性鼻窦炎的经济学评价
Pharmacoeconomics. 1999 Jan;15(1):97-113. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199915010-00007.
2
Diagnosis and treatment of acute and subacute sinusitis in children and adults.
Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 1998 Spring-Summer;16(1-2):157-204. doi: 10.1007/BF02739329.
3
Efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus phenoxymethylpenicillin in the treatment of acute maxillary sinusitis.阿奇霉素与青霉素V钾治疗急性上颌窦炎的疗效及安全性比较
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1996 Nov;15(11):849-53. doi: 10.1007/BF01691214.