头孢硫脒治疗急性细菌性鼻窦炎70例临床疗效观察  

Treatment of Acute Bacterial Sinusitis with Cefathiamidine: Analysis of 70 Cases

作　　者：陈小梅[1] 高春生[1] 王欢[1] 

机构地区：[1]深圳市南山区人民医院耳鼻咽喉科,深圳市518052

出　　处：《中国医院用药评价与分析》2010年第3期257-259,共3页Evaluation and Analysis of Drug-use in Hospitals of China

摘　　要：目的:评价头孢硫脒治疗急性细菌性鼻窦炎(ABS)的临床疗效。方法:将135例住院确诊为ABS患者,随机分为治疗组70例,对照组65例,治疗组用头孢硫脒2.0g,1日2次肌内注射,对照组用头孢哌酮/舒巴坦,2.0g,q12h静脉滴注,疗程均为7～14d,按照卫生部颁发的《抗菌药物临床应用指导原则》进行临床观察对比研究。结果:临床疗效分别为85.71%和89.23%;细菌学疗效分别为82.26%和85.96%,头孢硫脒与头孢哌酮/舒巴坦疗效相当。不良反应发生率头孢硫脒组为10.0%(7/70),头孢哌酮/舒巴坦组为9.23%(6/65)。均未见光毒性和肝毒性不良反应。结论:头孢硫脒与头孢哌酮/舒巴坦对ABS治疗同样安全有效。OBJECITVE： To evaluate the clinical efficacy of Cefathiamidine for acute bacterial sinusitis （ABS）. METHODS： 135 patients who were confirmed as having ABS were randomly assigned to receive either Cefathiamidine （2. 0 g qd） for 7 ～14 days （treatment group,n =70） or Cefoperazon/sulbactam （2. 0 g q12 h iv gtt） for 7 ～14 days （control group,n = 65）. A clinical comparative study was done according to the＂Guiding Principle for Clinical Research of Antibiotics＂issued by the National Health Ministry. RESULTS： The clinical response rates in the two groups were 85. 71% and 89. 23% ,respectively,with equivalent bacteriological response rate of 82. 26% vs. 85. 96% . The incidence of adverse reactions was 10. 0% （7 /70） for Cefathiamidine group vs. 9. 23% （6 /65） for Cefoperazon /sulbactam group. Neither phototoxicity nor hepatotoxicity was noted. CONCLUSION： Both Cefathiamidine and Cefoperazon / sulbactam are proved to be safe and effective for ABS.

关 键 词：头孢硫脒 头孢哌酮/舒巴坦 急性细菌性鼻窦炎 临床对比研究 

分 类 号：R978.1[医药卫生—药品]