特比萘芬与伊曲康唑治疗甲癣疗效的Meta分析(英文)

目的:比较特比萘芬与伊曲康唑治疗甲癣疗效的差异。方法:检索Medline等数据库,查找所有比较特比萘芬9伊曲康唑治疗18～60 a无系统疾病所患甲癣的双盲随机对照试验的文献,记录这2种药物治疗甲癣的真菌学治愈率并对其进行汇总分析,得出合并后真菌学治愈率的优势比(OR)及其95％的可信区间(CI)。结果:经筛选,共得到6篇符合标准的双盲随机对照试验;特比萘芬250 mg·d-1连续疗法组的真菌学治愈率高于伊曲康唑400 mg·d-1冲击疗法[OR=5．01,95％CI(3．42～7．33)]和伊曲康唑200 mg·d-1连续疗法[OR=2．58,95％CI(1．91～3．49)]。结论:特比萘芬治疗甲癣的疗效优于伊曲康唑。

Terbinafine versus itraconazole for treatment of dermatophyte onychomycosis: a meta-analysis

AIM: To access the difference of the efficacy between terbinafine and itraconazole in the treatment of dermatophyte onychomycosis. METHODS: The Medline, Science Direct On Site (SDOS) , and Springer database were searched in detail on the data of the mycological cure rates of the two antifungal agents for treatment of dermaphyte onychomycosis occourring in patients aged from 18 a to 60 a with the published double blind randomized clinical trials and then pooled. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Six treatises of double blind randomized clinical trials were selected for this analysis according to the screening criteria. The mycological cure rate of continuous terbinafine 250 mg per day was higher than that of either therapeutic effect of itraconazole pulse 400 mg per day (OR = 5.01, 95 % CI (3.42 - 7.33)) or continuous itraconazole 200 mg per day (OR = 2.58, 95 % CI (1.91 - 3.49)) . CONCLUSION : Terbinafine is more effective than itraconazole in the treatment of dermatophyte onychomycosis.