中国药师
中國藥師
중국약사
CHINA PHARMACIST
2015年
5期
812-813,814
,共3页
美罗培南%头孢哌酮/舒巴坦%重症细菌性肺部感染%疗效
美囉培南%頭孢哌酮/舒巴坦%重癥細菌性肺部感染%療效
미라배남%두포고동/서파탄%중증세균성폐부감염%료효
Meropenem%Cefoperazone / sulbactam%Severe bacterial lung infection%Efficacy
目的：：观察美罗培南治疗重症细菌性肺部感染的临床效果及不良反应。方法：62例重症细菌性肺部感染患者随机分为两组。对照组31例予注射用头孢哌酮/舒巴坦2~8 g+0.9%氯化钠注射液100 ml,ivd,q12h；观察组31例予美罗培南1 g+0.9%氯化钠注射液100 ml,ivd,q8h。两组患者均连续治疗14 d。比较两组细菌清除率、二重感染率和临床疗效,观察药品不良反应发生情况。结果：对照组与观察组细菌清除率分别为85.2%和92.8%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组二重感染率和总有效率分别为3.6%和96.77%,均明显优于对照组(P<0.05)。两组药品不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论：美罗培南治疗重症细菌性肺部感染临床效果好,可有效清除细菌,降低二重感染,疗效优于头孢哌酮/舒巴坦。
目的：：觀察美囉培南治療重癥細菌性肺部感染的臨床效果及不良反應。方法：62例重癥細菌性肺部感染患者隨機分為兩組。對照組31例予註射用頭孢哌酮/舒巴坦2~8 g+0.9%氯化鈉註射液100 ml,ivd,q12h；觀察組31例予美囉培南1 g+0.9%氯化鈉註射液100 ml,ivd,q8h。兩組患者均連續治療14 d。比較兩組細菌清除率、二重感染率和臨床療效,觀察藥品不良反應髮生情況。結果：對照組與觀察組細菌清除率分彆為85.2%和92.8%,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。觀察組二重感染率和總有效率分彆為3.6%和96.77%,均明顯優于對照組(P<0.05)。兩組藥品不良反應髮生率比較,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。結論：美囉培南治療重癥細菌性肺部感染臨床效果好,可有效清除細菌,降低二重感染,療效優于頭孢哌酮/舒巴坦。
목적：：관찰미라배남치료중증세균성폐부감염적림상효과급불량반응。방법：62례중증세균성폐부감염환자수궤분위량조。대조조31례여주사용두포고동/서파탄2~8 g+0.9%록화납주사액100 ml,ivd,q12h；관찰조31례여미라배남1 g+0.9%록화납주사액100 ml,ivd,q8h。량조환자균련속치료14 d。비교량조세균청제솔、이중감염솔화림상료효,관찰약품불량반응발생정황。결과：대조조여관찰조세균청제솔분별위85.2%화92.8%,차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)。관찰조이중감염솔화총유효솔분별위3.6%화96.77%,균명현우우대조조(P<0.05)。량조약품불량반응발생솔비교,차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)。결론：미라배남치료중증세균성폐부감염림상효과호,가유효청제세균,강저이중감염,료효우우두포고동/서파탄。
Objective:To observe the clinical effects and adverse reactions of meropenem in the treatment of severe lung infection. Methods:Totally 62 severe bacterial lung infection patients were randomly divided into two groups randomly. The patients in the con-trol group (31 cases ) were treated with cefoperazone / sulbactam 2-8 g in 100 ml 0. 9% sodium chloride injections,ivd,q12h, and the treatment group (31 cases ) was treated with meropenem 1 g in 100 ml 0. 9% sodium chloride injections,ivd,q8h. The treatment course was 14 days. The bacterial clearance rate, dual infection rate, clinical efficacy and adverse drug reactions of the two groups were observed and compared. Results:The bacterial clearance rate in the control group was 85. 2% and that in the treatment group was 92. 85% (P>0. 05). The incidence rate of dual infection in the treatment group (3. 6%) was significant lower than that in the control group (P<0. 05). The total effective rate in the treatment group (96. 77%) was significant higher than that in the control group ( P<0. 05). The adverse reactions of the two groups had no significant difference (P>0. 05). Conclusion:Meropenem is ef-fective in the treatment of severe bacterial lung infection. It can clear bacteria and reduce dual infection effectively, which shows better efficacy than cefoperazone / sulbactam.
