头孢哌酮舒巴坦2∶1与1∶1两种配方治疗下呼吸道感染的疗效比较

目的 :比较头孢哌酮 舒巴坦 2∶1新配方与1∶1配方治疗下呼吸道感染的临床疗效。方法 :54例下呼吸道感染病人分为试验组和对照组各 2 7例 ,分别静脉滴注头孢哌酮 舒巴坦 (2∶1为试验组 ) 3g或头孢哌酮 舒巴坦 (1∶1为对照组 ) 4 g,均bid ,共 7～1 4d。结果 :试验组有效率为 85 % (1 3/ 2 7) ,其中治愈率为 33 % (9/ 2 7) ;对照组有效率为 85 %(1 3/ 2 7) ,其中治愈率 2 2 % (6/ 2 7)。试验组和对照组细菌清除率分别为 94%和 80 % ,均P >0 .0 5。不良反应发生率分别为 1 1 % (3/ 2 7)和 7%(2 / 2 7)。结论 :头孢哌酮 舒巴坦 2∶1和头孢哌酮 舒巴坦 1∶1治疗下呼吸道细菌感染具有相似的临床疗效。

Efficacy of cefoperazone/sulbactam 2∶1 vs cefoperazone/sulb actam 1∶1 in treatment of lower respiratory tract infections

AIM: To compare the clinical efficacy of cefoperazone /sulbactam 2∶1 cefoperazone/sulbactam 1∶1 in treatment of lower respiratory tr act infections. METHODS: Multicenter open-label clinical trial was conducted. Fifty-four pat ients with lower respiratory tract infections were randomly divided into two gro ups. Twenty-seven patients (M 17, F 10; age (66±s 8)a) were treated with c efoperazone/sulbactam 2∶1, 3 g, iv, gtt, bid for 7-14 d. The other twenty-seve n patients (M 19, F 7; age (62±7)a) were treated with cefoperazone/sulbactam 1∶1 , 4 g, iv, gtt, bid for 7-14 d. The clinical efficacy, bacterial clearance and s afety were observed. RESULTS: The effective rate of cefoperazone/sulbactam 2∶1 was 85 %(13/ 27 inc luding cured 9 and significant improvement 4). The effective rate of cefoperazon e/ sulbactam 1∶1 was 85 % (13/ 27 including cured 6 and significant imrpovement 7) . The bacterial clearance rate was 94 % in group cefoperazone/sulbactam 2∶1 and 8 0 % in group cefoperazone/sulbactam 1∶1. The adverse reaction rate was 11 %(3/ 2 7) in group cefoperazone/sulbactam 2∶1 and 7 %(2/ 27) in group cefoperazone/sulbac tam 1∶1. CONCLUSION: The clinical efficacy between cefoperazone/sulbactam 2∶1 and cefo perazone/sulbactam 1∶1 is similar.