• 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

导致腹腔内或皮肤/软组织感染治疗临床失败的危险因素。

Risk factors leading to clinical failure in the treatment of intra-abdominal or skin/soft tissue infections.

作者信息

Falagas M E, Barefoot L, Griffith J, Ruthazar R, Snydman D R

机构信息

Division of Infectious Diseases, New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1996 Dec;15(12):913-21. doi: 10.1007/BF01690508.

DOI:10.1007/BF01690508
PMID:9031873
Abstract

A study of determinants of outcome in adult patients with intra-abdominal or skin/soft tissue infections treated with cefotetan, cefoxitin, or ampicillin/sulbactam monotherapy was undertaken. Patients were matched for principal infectious process, surgery performed for the management of the infection, year of hospital admission, age, and sex. The criteria for inclusion, exclusion, and matching of patients and assignment of clinical and microbiological outcome were based on the 1992 Infectious Diseases Society of America/Federal Drug Administration guidelines for the evaluation of anti-infective drug products. One hundred and thirty-seven cases of intra-abdominal or skin and soft tissue infections treated with cefotetan (n = 47), cefoxitin (n = 43), or ampicillin/sulbactam (n = 47) monotherapy were selected without knowledge of outcome and analyzed using a single blinded analysis. The baseline characteristics did not differ between the treatment groups, nor did the rates of clinical or microbiological failure. A multivariate analysis showed that isolation of an organism resistant to the treatment regimen, including Pseudomonas spp., [odds ratio (OR) = 14.9, p = 0.001], being on antibiotic therapy at the time of admission (OR = 4.5, p = 0.007), and diagnosis of a complicated intra-abdominal infection (OR = 3.5, p = 0.014) were independently associated with clinical failure. These data support the assertion that antibiotic resistant organisms in mixed anaerobic/aerobic infections are associated with clinical failure and suggest that the antibiotic regimen should be modified to include Pseudomonas spp. in its spectrum when this organism is isolated from patients with such infections.

摘要

开展了一项关于接受头孢替坦、头孢西丁或氨苄西林/舒巴坦单药治疗的成年腹腔内或皮肤/软组织感染患者结局决定因素的研究。患者在主要感染过程、为控制感染而进行的手术、入院年份、年龄和性别方面进行了匹配。患者的纳入、排除和匹配标准以及临床和微生物学结局的判定基于1992年美国传染病学会/联邦药物管理局评估抗感染药物产品的指南。在不了解结局的情况下,选择了137例接受头孢替坦(n = 47)、头孢西丁(n = 43)或氨苄西林/舒巴坦(n = 47)单药治疗的腹腔内或皮肤及软组织感染病例,并采用单盲分析进行分析。各治疗组之间的基线特征以及临床或微生物学失败率均无差异。多变量分析显示,分离出对治疗方案耐药的微生物,包括假单胞菌属(优势比[OR]=14.9,p = 0.001)、入院时接受抗生素治疗(OR = 4.5,p = 0.007)以及诊断为复杂性腹腔内感染(OR = 3.5,p = 0.014)与临床失败独立相关。这些数据支持了以下观点:混合需氧/厌氧菌感染中的抗生素耐药微生物与临床失败相关,并表明当从此类感染患者中分离出该微生物时,应调整抗生素方案,使其抗菌谱包括假单胞菌属。

相似文献

1
Risk factors leading to clinical failure in the treatment of intra-abdominal or skin/soft tissue infections.导致腹腔内或皮肤/软组织感染治疗临床失败的危险因素。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1996 Dec;15(12):913-21. doi: 10.1007/BF01690508.
2
Ampicillin/sulbactam and cefoxitin in the treatment of cutaneous and other soft-tissue abscesses in patients with or without histories of injection drug abuse.
Clin Infect Dis. 2000 Aug;31(2):464-71. doi: 10.1086/313971. Epub 2000 Sep 14.
3
Pharmacoeconomic analysis of ampicillin-sulbactam versus cefoxitin in the treatment of intraabdominal infections.
Pharmacotherapy. 1998 Jan-Feb;18(1):175-83.
4
Comparison of cefoxitin, cefotetan, and ampicillin/sulbactam as prophylaxis for polymicrobial infection in mice.头孢西丁、头孢替坦和氨苄西林/舒巴坦作为小鼠多微生物感染预防药物的比较。
Clin Infect Dis. 1995 Jun;20 Suppl 2:S376-7. doi: 10.1093/clinids/20.supplement_2.s376.
5
Comparison of cefoxitin, cefotetan and the combination of ampicillin with sulbactam in the therapy of polymicrobial infection in mice.头孢西丁、头孢替坦及氨苄西林与舒巴坦联合用药对小鼠多菌感染治疗效果的比较
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1994 Nov;34(5):791-6. doi: 10.1093/jac/34.5.791.
6
Ampicillin/sulbactam versus cefotetan for the prevention of infection following cesarean delivery in high-risk patients: a randomized double-blind trial.氨苄西林/舒巴坦与头孢替坦预防高危患者剖宫产术后感染的随机双盲试验
Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1997;44(1):21-5. doi: 10.1159/000291403.
7
A comparison of ampicillin/sulbactam and cefoxitin in the treatment of bacterial skin and skin-structure infections.
Adv Ther. 1994 Jul-Aug;11(4):183-91.
8
Successful treatment of skin and soft tissue infection due to carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii by ampicillin-sulbactam and meropenem combination therapy.美罗培南与氨苄西林-舒巴坦联合治疗碳青霉烯类耐药鲍曼不动杆菌所致皮肤软组织感染一例
Int J Infect Dis. 2013 Dec;17(12):e1234-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2013.05.002. Epub 2013 Jun 21.
9
Cost-effectiveness study of cefotetan versus cefoxitin and cefotetan versus combination antibiotic regimens.
Am J Surg. 1988 May 31;155(5A):96-101. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(88)80222-8.
10
The role of beta-lactam antimicrobials as single agents in treatment of intra-abdominal infection.β-内酰胺类抗菌药物作为单一药物在腹腔内感染治疗中的作用。
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2000;1(1):57-63. doi: 10.1089/109629600321308.

引用本文的文献

1
Intra-abdominal infections: the role of different classifications on the selection of the best antibiotic treatment.腹腔内感染:不同分类在选择最佳抗生素治疗中的作用。
BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Nov 21;19(1):980. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-4604-0.
2
Cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with piperacillin/tazobactam as empiric therapy based on the in-vitro surveillance of bacterial isolates in the United States for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections.基于美国细菌分离株体外监测结果,比较头孢洛扎/他唑巴坦与哌拉西林/他唑巴坦作为经验性治疗方案用于治疗复杂性尿路感染的成本效益。
BMC Infect Dis. 2017 Apr 28;17(1):314. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2408-7.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Efficacy of a beta-lactamase inhibitor combination for serious intraabdominal infections.β-内酰胺酶抑制剂组合治疗严重腹腔内感染的疗效
Ann Surg. 1993 Feb;217(2):115-21. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199302000-00004.
2
Principles of antibiotic therapy.抗生素治疗原则。
Surg Clin North Am. 1994 Jun;74(3):497-517.
3
Antibiotic treatment of anaerobic infections.
Clin Infect Dis. 1994 May;18 Suppl 4:S305-10. doi: 10.1093/clinids/18.supplement_4.s305.
Phase 2, Dose-Ranging Study of Relebactam with Imipenem-Cilastatin in Subjects with Complicated Intra-abdominal Infection.
在复杂性腹腔内感染患者中进行的瑞来巴坦与亚胺培南-西司他丁联用的2期剂量范围研究。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016 Sep 23;60(10):6234-43. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00633-16. Print 2016 Oct.
4
The opposing forces of the intestinal microbiome and the emerging pathobiome.肠道微生物群与新兴病理生物群的对抗力量。
Surg Clin North Am. 2014 Dec;94(6):1151-61. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2014.08.002. Epub 2014 Oct 7.
5
Efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin in hospitalized patients with secondary peritonitis: pooled analysis of four randomized phase III trials.莫西沙星治疗继发性腹膜炎住院患者的疗效与安全性:四项随机III期试验的汇总分析
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2014 Oct;15(5):567-75. doi: 10.1089/sur.2013.045. Epub 2014 May 15.
6
Combination therapy for treatment of infections with gram-negative bacteria.联合治疗用于治疗革兰氏阴性菌感染。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2012 Jul;25(3):450-70. doi: 10.1128/CMR.05041-11.
7
Susceptibility of Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates from intra-abdominal infections and molecular characterization of ertapenem-resistant isolates.腹腔感染中产超广谱β-内酰胺酶肺炎克雷伯菌的耐药性及耐药机制研究
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011 Aug;55(8):3917-21. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00070-11. Epub 2011 Jun 13.
8
The human microbiome and surgical disease.人类微生物组与外科疾病。
Ann Surg. 2011 Jun;253(6):1094-101. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31821175d7.
9
Canadian practice guidelines for surgical intra-abdominal infections.加拿大外科腹腔内感染诊疗指南
Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2010 Spring;21(1):11-37. doi: 10.1155/2010/580340.
10
Resistance and the management of complicated skin and skin structure infections: the role of ceftobiprole.耐药与复杂性皮肤及皮肤结构感染的管理:头孢托罗的作用。
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2010 Oct 5;6:485-95. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S5823.
4
Intra-abdominal sepsis.腹腔内脓毒症
Med Clin North Am. 1995 May;79(3):599-617. doi: 10.1016/s0025-7125(16)30059-1.
5
Definition of the role of enterococcus in intraabdominal infection: analysis of a prospective randomized trial.肠球菌在腹腔内感染中的作用定义:一项前瞻性随机试验的分析
Surgery. 1995 Oct;118(4):716-21; discussion 721-3. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6060(05)80040-6.
6
Risk of infection after penetrating abdominal trauma.穿透性腹部创伤后的感染风险。
N Engl J Med. 1984 Oct 25;311(17):1065-70. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198410253111701.
7
Antibiotic trials in intra-abdominal infections. A critical evaluation of study design and outcome reporting.腹腔内感染的抗生素试验。对研究设计和结果报告的批判性评价。
Ann Surg. 1984 Jul;200(1):29-39. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198407000-00005.
8
A prospective comparison of two regimens of prophylactic antibiotics in abdominal trauma: cefoxitin versus triple drug.
J Trauma. 1984 Apr;24(4):307-10. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198404000-00004.
9
Perforated and gangrenous appendicitis: an analysis of antibiotic failures.穿孔性和坏疽性阑尾炎:抗生素治疗失败的分析
J Infect Dis. 1983 Aug;148(2):322-9. doi: 10.1093/infdis/148.2.322.
10
A randomized clinical trial of moxalactam alone versus tobramycin plus clindamycin in abdominal sepsis.莫西拉坦单药与妥布霉素加克林霉素治疗腹部脓毒症的随机临床试验。
Ann Surg. 1983 Jul;198(1):35-41. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198307000-00007.