Suppr超能文献

[Comparative study on the efficacy of ritipenem acoxil and cefotiam hexetil in chronic lower respiratory tract infections by the double-blind method].

作者信息

Saito A, Saito A, Kawakami Y, Yamaguchi E, Koba H, Abe S, Ohmichi M, Hiraga Y, Kikuchi K, Ohsaki Y, Matsumoto H, Inoue H, Yoshida M, Mouri T, Kobayashi H, Ito T, Bando T, Takeuchi K, Hirano H, Tanifuji Y, Tanno Y, Shirato K, Takahashi M, Sakamoto M, Nakashima M

机构信息

Department of General Internal Medicine, Jikei University.

出版信息

Jpn J Antibiot. 1996 Mar;49(3):219-49.

PMID:8935119
Abstract

To objectively evaluate the efficacy, safety and usefulness of the newly developed penem oral antibiotic, ritipenem acoxil (RIPM-AC), against chronic lower respiratory tract infections, we conducted a multi-center double-blind comparative study using cefotiam hexetil (CTM-HE) as a control drug. RIPM-AC was orally administered at 200 mg, and CTM-HE at 400 mg, t.i.d. for 14 days, in principle. The results were as follows: The total number of patients enrolled in this trial was 202, of which 151 cases (RIPM-AC group: 75, CTM-HE group: 76) were evaluable for clinical efficacy. 1. The clinical efficacy rates (excellent+good) were 85.3% (64/75) in the RIPM-AC group and 80.3% (61/76) in the CTM-HE group. There was no significant difference between the two groups, hence the clinical equivalency of RIPM-AC to CTM-HE was demonstrated. 2. In the patients enrolled in the evaluation of clinical efficacy, the eradication rates of the causative organisms were 50.0% (13/26) in the RIPM-AC group and 75.0% (18/24) in the CTM-HE group, with no significant difference between the two groups. 3. Side effects were noted in 10 cases (11.0%) of the RIPM-AC group and 10 cases (10.9%) of the CTM-HE group. Abnormal laboratory test findings were observed in 8 cases(9.5%) of the RIPM-AC group and in 14 cases (16.7%) of the CTM-HE group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of side effects and abnormal laboratory test findings. In the safety evaluation, RIPM-AC was judged to be safe in 73 cases (80.2%) and CTM-HE in 71 cases (77.2%), with no significant difference. 4. The usefulness rates (markedly useful+useful) were 79.5% (62/78) in the RIPM-AC group and 76.9% (60/78) in the CTM-HE group. There was no significant difference between the two groups. Since RIPM-AC showed clinical efficacy similar to those of CTM-HE and posed no particular safety problems, it is expected to be a useful antibiotic for the treatment of chronic lower respiratory tract infections.

摘要

相似文献

4
[Clinical evaluation of cefuzonam (CZON) for bacterial pneumonia and lung abscess: comparative study with cefotiam (CTM)].
Kansenshogaku Zasshi. 1991 Apr;65(4):381-99. doi: 10.11150/kansenshogakuzasshi1970.65.381.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验