CAJ | 학술논문

目的：对常见头孢类抗生素进行体外抑菌活性研究。方法：利用头孢氨苄、头孢唑啉、头孢呋辛、头孢替安、头孢他啶、头孢哌酮6种常见头孢类抗生素对我院临床分离的562株菌（革兰氏阳性菌206株，革兰氏阴性菌356株）进行体外活性检测。结果：头孢氨苄、头孢唑啉（1代）对革兰氏阳性菌的敏感率为93.2％、96.1％，对革兰氏阴性菌的敏感率为52.3％、55.1％；头孢呋辛、头孢替安（2代）对革兰氏阳性菌的敏感率为95.6％、97.1％，对革兰氏阴性菌的敏感率为75.3％、76.4％；头孢他啶、头孢哌酮（3代）对革兰氏阳性菌的敏感率为85.4％、87.4％，对革兰氏阴性菌的敏感率为90.2％、92.1％。1代、2代头孢类抗生素对革兰氏阳性菌的抑菌活性高于3代，而3代头孢类抗生素对革兰氏阴性菌的抑菌活性高于1代、2代，且差异具有统计学意义（P ＜0.05）；1代和2代对革兰氏阳性菌的抑菌活性差异无统计学意义（P ＜0.05）。结论：1代、2代头孢类抗生素体外抑制革兰氏阳性菌效果好于3代头孢，3代头孢体外抑制革兰氏阴性菌效果好于1代、2代。
목적：대상견두포류항생소진행체외억균활성연구。방법：이용두포안변、두포서람、두포부신、두포체안、두포타정、두포고동6충상견두포류항생소대아원림상분리적562주균（혁란씨양성균206주，혁란씨음성균356주）진행체외활성검측。결과：두포안변、두포서람（1대）대혁란씨양성균적민감솔위93.2％、96.1％，대혁란씨음성균적민감솔위52.3％、55.1％；두포부신、두포체안（2대）대혁란씨양성균적민감솔위95.6％、97.1％，대혁란씨음성균적민감솔위75.3％、76.4％；두포타정、두포고동（3대）대혁란씨양성균적민감솔위85.4％、87.4％，대혁란씨음성균적민감솔위90.2％、92.1％。1대、2대두포류항생소대혁란씨양성균적억균활성고우3대，이3대두포류항생소대혁란씨음성균적억균활성고우1대、2대，차차이구유통계학의의（P ＜0.05）；1대화2대대혁란씨양성균적억균활성차이무통계학의의（P ＜0.05）。결론：1대、2대두포류항생소체외억제혁란씨양성균효과호우3대두포，3대두포체외억제혁란씨음성균효과호우1대、2대。
Objective To study the antibacterial activity in vitro of common cephalosporin antibiotics.Methods 562 strains of clinical isolates,206 strains of gram positive bacteria and 356 strains of gram negative bacteria were selected in our hospital and the a-bove bacterial strains were used to detect and compare the antibacterial activity in vitro of the common cephalosporin antibiotics (cepha-losporin,ampicillin,cefazolin,cefuroxime,cefotiam,ceftazidime,cefoperazone).Results The sensitive rates of cefalexin and cefazo-lin (1 st generation)against gram positive bacteria were 93.2% and 96.1 ,The sensitivity rates of those medicines against gram nega-tive bacteria were 52.3% and 55.1%.The sensitive rates of cefuroxime and cefotiam (2 rd generation)the gram positive bacteria were 95.6% and 97.1% while the sensitive rates of those medicines against the gram negative bacteria were 75.3% and 76.4%.The sensitive rates of ceftazidime and cefoperazone (3 rd generation)against the gram positive bacteria were 85.4% while87.4% while the sensitive rate of those medicines against the gram negative bacteria were 90.2% and 92.1%.The antimicrobial activity of 1 st genera-tion and 2 rd generation cephalosporin against gram positive bacteria were higher than that of the 3 rd generation cephalosporin while the antimicrobial activity of the 3 rd generation cephalosporin against gram negative bacteria is higher than those of the 1 st generation and the 2 rd generation.The differences of the antibacterial activity above were (P <0.05).The antimicrobial activity of 1 st generation and 2 rd generation of cephalosporin against gram positive bacteria was not significant difference (P >0.05).Conclusion The effect of the 1 st generation and 2 rd generation cephalosporin in vitro against gram positive bacteria is better than that of the 3 rd generation cephalosporin while the effect of the 3 rd generation cephalosporin in vitro against gram negative bacteria is better than that of the 1 st generation and the 2 rd generation cephalosporin.