吡哌酸滴丸与氯霉素滴耳液治疗化脓性中耳炎的比较  

Pipemidic acid pills vs chloramphenicol ear drops in treating suppurative otitis media

作　　者：陈召晖[1] 辛俊[1] 麦军利[1] 夏尚全[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民解放军兰州军区乌鲁木齐总医院

出　　处：《新药与临床》1997年第5期263-264,共2页

摘　　要：目的：比较吡哌酸滴丸与氯霉素滴耳液治疗化脓性中耳炎的疗效。方法：化脓性中耳炎３０例（男性１９例，女性１１例；年龄３２±ｓ１７ａ），用吡哌酸滴丸１～２丸放至鼓膜穿孔处，每日换药１次；同期用氯霉素滴耳液治疗２９例作对照，疗程均１４ｄ。结果：吡哌酸滴丸组和氯霉素滴耳液组总有效率分别为９３％和７０％（Ｐ＜０．０５），治愈天数分别为５．６±２．８ｄ和１２．０±２．８ｄ（Ｐ＜０．０１）。细菌清除率分别为６２％和２８％；细菌阴转率分别为８７％和４３％（Ｐ＜０．０１）。结论：吡哌酸滴丸是治疗化脓性中耳炎较满意的药物。AIM: To compare pipemidic acid pills (PAP) and chloramphenicol ear drops (CED) in treatment of suppurative otitis media. METHODS: Thirty patients (M 19, F 11; age 32±s 17 a) with pyogenic tympanitis were put into nearby the perforating side of the tympanic membrane with PAP 1 or 2 pills, qd for 2 wk. Other similar 29 patients were treated with CED. RESULTS: The total effective rates of PAP and CED groups were 93% and 70%, the average days of treatment were 5.6±2.8 d and 12.0±2.8 d, the becteriological eradication rates were 62% and 28%, the negative conversion rates were 87% and 43%, respectively. There were significant difference between the 2 groups (P<0.01). No adverse reaction of PAP was noted. CONCLUSTION: PAP is an effective drug in treating pyogenic tympanitis.

关 键 词：吡哌酸 化脓性中耳炎 氯霉素 

分 类 号：R764.210.5[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]