塞克硝唑片治疗口腔冠周炎的疗效和安全性分析

目的：探讨使用塞克硝唑治疗口腔冠周炎的临床疗效和安全性。方法：对本院口腔科诊治的59例口腔冠周炎并确诊有厌氧菌感染患者进行回顾性的分析,随机分为试验组和对照组两组,试验组给予塞克硝唑治疗,对照组给予替硝唑治疗,分析比较两组的临床疗效、细菌清除率和不良反应。结果：在用药治疗前后,试验组的痊愈率明显高于对照组,比较差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;试验组有效率虽高于对照组,但两组比较差异无统计学意义;对于常见的口腔厌氧菌,塞克硝唑的细菌清除率（55.6%）高于替硝唑（50.0%）,但比较差异无统计学意义;主要厌氧菌药物的MIC测定结果显示,两种药物对口腔主要的厌氧菌均有较强的抗菌作用,而塞克硝唑的体外抗厌氧菌活性稍强于替硝唑;试验组和对照组均有出现不同比例的轻度不良反应,试验组的不良反应发生率低于对照组,但比较差异无统计学意义。结论：塞克硝唑治疗口腔厌氧菌导致的冠周炎疗效良好、确定,对口腔厌氧菌抗菌作用较强,生物耐受性好,安全性高,不良反应发生率小,可作为临床治疗口腔厌氧菌性冠周炎的较佳选择。

Study on the Efficacy and Safety of Secnidazole in Treatment of Pericoronitis

Objective： To investigate the efficacy and safety of secnidazole in treatment of pericoronitis. Method： 59 peridontitis patients were divided into two groups randomly： experimental group and contrast group. The patients of experimental group were given secnidazole, the patients of contrast group were given tinidazole. To analyze the efficacy, clearance of pathogens and adverse reactions. Result： After treatment, the recovery rate of experimental group was significantly higher than that of the contrast group, with statistical significance （ P〈0.05 ） . Bacterial clearance rate of common oral anaerobic bacteria of the experimental group （ 55.6% ） was higher than that of the contrast group （ 50% ）, without statistical significance. Two drugs both had strong antibacterial effect for major oral anaerobic bacteria and activity against anaerobic bacteria in vitro of secnidazole was slightly stronger than tinidazole based on the result of MIC determination for main anaerobe drug. The adverse reactions rate of experimental group was lower than that of thecontrast group, without statistical significance. Conclusion： Secnidazole is effective and safe in the treatment of pericoronitis.