检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]海军总医院,北京100037
出 处:《中国药学杂志》2005年第12期933-936,共4页Chinese Pharmaceutical Journal
摘 要:目的对左氧氟沙星(levofloxacin,LVFX)在治疗呼吸系统感染病人中不同给药方案进行比较。方法病人被分为2组,按照不同给药方案给药,组1为静脉输注给药200mg,每12h1次;组2为左氧氟沙星400mg,静脉输注给药,每24h1次。高效液相色谱法测定病人血药浓度。根据不同给药方案中左氧氟沙星的PK-PD特点,评价2种不同给药方案临床疗效。结果药动学研究结果表明,组1的药物峰浓度(cmax)明显低于组2(P<0.001),组1的谷浓度明显高于组2(P<0.001)。PK-PD研究结果表明,与体外抗菌活性研究结果比较,cmax/MIC90值显示,组1给药方案对于肺炎克雷伯菌和变形杆菌抗菌作用较强,组2对肺炎克雷伯菌、肠杆菌、变形杆菌、β-溶血链球菌和不动杆菌可产生有效的抗菌作用(cmax/MIC90≥10)。2组临床疗效如体温,白细胞检查及X-光学检查方面,无明显差异。2组间不良反应发生率无差异。结论组1的给药方案血药浓度波动较小,组2的给药方案峰浓度较高,抗菌作用较强,给药次数少,2组临床疗效及不良反应发生率无差异。OBJECTIVE: To compare the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of levofloxacin(LVFX) 200 mg q12 h vs 400 mg qd in the treatment of patients with respiratory tract infections. METHODS: 24 patients were divided into two groups. 200 mg LVFX was administered to the patients in group 1 twice a day with in travenous infusion. 400 mg LVFX was administered to the patients in groups 2 every 24 h with intravenous infusion. Serum concentrations of LVFX were measured by HPLC. Clinical efficacy of two dosage regimen was evaluated by PK-PD characteristics of two regimens of LVFX. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic study showed that the peak concentration of group 1 was significantly lower than that of group 2 (P 90 in vitro ( C max/MIC90 ≥ 10) showed LVFX in group 1 (had) more powerful activity against Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus species, LVFX in group 2 appeared more powerful activity against Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter species, Proteus species, β-hemophilus streptococcus and acinetobacter. Clinical efficacy and incidence rate of adverse drug reaction in two groups were not significant different, as well as body temperature, white blood cell and X-radiodiagnostics. CONCLUSION: The fluctuation of LVFX concentrations in group 1 was smaller. The peak level of LVFX in group 2 was higher, antibiotic activity was more powerful and the interval of infusion was longer (qd). The clinical efficacy in two groups was satisfactory in treatment of respiratory tract infections.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.173