头孢泊肟酯与头孢克肟治疗急性细菌性感染随机对照研究  

A Randomized Clinical Study of Cefpodoxime Proxetil vs Cefixime in Treatment of Acute Bacterial Infections

作　　者：张涛[1] 顾起有[1] 杨后贵 郭杨庆 

机构地区：[1]广东南雄市人民医院,南雄512400

出　　处：《海峡药学》2006年第2期100-102,共3页Strait Pharmaceutical Journal

摘　　要：目的 比较头孢泊肟酯与头孢克肟治疗急性细菌性感染的安全性、有效性。方法 采用随机对照研究方法，以头孢克肟为对照，入选细菌感染性疾病115例，其中头孢泊肟酯试验组60例，头孢克肟对照组55例．2组的用量，用法试验组为100mg，po．bid，对照组为200mg，po，bid,疗程均为7～12d．结果 2年临床总痊愈率分别为73％和69％，总有效率分别为92％和91％．细菌清除率分别为98％和94％，不良反应率分别为7%和6％，经统计学处理均无显著差异（P〉0．05）．结论 头孢泊肟酯治疗急性细菌性感染临床安全，有效。OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safely and efficacy of cefpodoxime proxetil vs cefixime in the treatment of acute bacterial infections. METHODS A randomized clinical study was conducted for comparing domestic cefpodoxime proxetil with cefixime. 115 patinents were enrolled in the study, 60 in domestic cefpodoxime proxetil group,55 in control group. Cefpodoxime proxetil was used as 100mg po. Twice a day and cefixime Was used 200mg po. twice a day for 7～14 days. RESULTS In trial and controlled group the total Cure rate were： 73% 69%, respectively; the total efficacy rate are 92% and 91%, respectively; the total bacterial clearance： rates of both groups were 98 % and 94 % respectively. Adverse reactions were observed for 7% and 60% of patients in the two groups. There were no statistically significant difference between teh results of both groups （P〉 0. 05）. CONCLUSIONS cefpodoxime proxetil are effective and safe in the treatment of acute bacterial infections.

关 键 词：头孢泊肟酯 头孢克肟 细菌性感染 随机对照治疗 

分 类 号：R969.4[医药卫生—药理学]