中国医学创新
中國醫學創新
중국의학창신
MEDICAL INNOVATION OF CHINA
2015年
12期
110-112
,共3页
慢性阻塞性肺疾病%预防%真菌感染
慢性阻塞性肺疾病%預防%真菌感染
만성조새성폐질병%예방%진균감염
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease%Prevention%Fungal infection
目的:探讨抗真菌治疗药物对重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的预防性治疗效果。方法:采用随机数字表法将本院的140例COPD患者分为两组,对照组予常规治疗,治疗组予常规治疗基础上加用氟康唑治疗,对比两组不同年龄层、不同临床分级患者住院期间肺部真菌感染率以及不良反应。结果:70~80年龄段患者中,治疗组和对照组真菌感染率分别是0(0/40)和15.00%(6/40),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在极重度COPD级别中,治疗组和对照组真菌感染率分别是0(0/36)和15.38%(6/39),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。60~70年龄段患者中两组真菌感染率比较(0 vs 2.50%)及重度级别COPD中两组真菌感染率比较(0 vs 2.44%),差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组间不良反应发生率无明显差异。结论:早期应用抗真菌药治疗对70~80年龄段或极重度COPD患者的肺部真菌感染有预防作用,且无明显不良反应。
目的:探討抗真菌治療藥物對重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的預防性治療效果。方法:採用隨機數字錶法將本院的140例COPD患者分為兩組,對照組予常規治療,治療組予常規治療基礎上加用氟康唑治療,對比兩組不同年齡層、不同臨床分級患者住院期間肺部真菌感染率以及不良反應。結果:70~80年齡段患者中,治療組和對照組真菌感染率分彆是0(0/40)和15.00%(6/40),兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。在極重度COPD級彆中,治療組和對照組真菌感染率分彆是0(0/36)和15.38%(6/39),兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。60~70年齡段患者中兩組真菌感染率比較(0 vs 2.50%)及重度級彆COPD中兩組真菌感染率比較(0 vs 2.44%),差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05)。兩組間不良反應髮生率無明顯差異。結論:早期應用抗真菌藥治療對70~80年齡段或極重度COPD患者的肺部真菌感染有預防作用,且無明顯不良反應。
목적:탐토항진균치료약물대중도만성조새성폐질병(COPD)환자적예방성치료효과。방법:채용수궤수자표법장본원적140례COPD환자분위량조,대조조여상규치료,치료조여상규치료기출상가용불강서치료,대비량조불동년령층、불동림상분급환자주원기간폐부진균감염솔이급불량반응。결과:70~80년령단환자중,치료조화대조조진균감염솔분별시0(0/40)화15.00%(6/40),량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。재겁중도COPD급별중,치료조화대조조진균감염솔분별시0(0/36)화15.38%(6/39),량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。60~70년령단환자중량조진균감염솔비교(0 vs 2.50%)급중도급별COPD중량조진균감염솔비교(0 vs 2.44%),차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05)。량조간불량반응발생솔무명현차이。결론:조기응용항진균약치료대70~80년령단혹겁중도COPD환자적폐부진균감염유예방작용,차무명현불량반응。
Objective:To investigate the prophylactic effect of antifungal therapy in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD).Method:140 patients with COPD in our hospital were divided into two groups randomly.The control group were received routine therapy, the observation group were given routine treatment combined with fluconazole therapy.The pulmonary fungal infection rate at different ages and different clinical scale of two groups were compared.Result:In patients at 70-80 ages, the fungal infection rates were 0 (0/40) and 15.00%(6/40) in treatment group and control group respectively, with a significant difference between two groups (P<0.05).At very severe scale patients, the fungal infection rates of treatment group and control group were 0 (0/36) and 15.38% (6/39) respectively, with a significant difference between two groups (P<0.05).Compared the fungal infection rates in patients at aged 60-70 (0 vs 2.50%) and at severe scale (0 vs 2.44%) of two groups, the differences were not statistically significant(P>0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups had no significant difference.Conclusion:Early application of antifungal treatment on COPD patients at 70-80 ages or at very severe clinical scale, has a preventive effect, and no obvious adverse reaction.