亚胺培南西司他丁钠和美罗培南治疗开颅术后颅内感染的比较分析  

Comparison of effects and safety of imipenem-cilastatin versus meropenem against intracranial infection after craniotomy

作　　者：李晓敏[1,2] 孙宇[1] 梁永利[1,2] 史国兵[1] 党大胜[1] 

机构地区：[1]沈阳军区总医院药学部,辽宁沈阳110016 [2]沈阳药科大学生命科学与生物制药学院,辽宁沈阳110016

出　　处：《中国医院药学杂志》2016年第16期1396-1400,共5页Chinese Journal of Hospital Pharmacy

摘　　要：目的:比较亚胺培南西司他丁钠和美罗培南治疗开颅术后颅内感染的有效性和安全性。方法:回顾性分析2010年10月至2015年10月于某三甲医院神经外科行开颅手术后并发颅内感染且单独应用亚胺培南西司他丁钠或美罗培南的患者127例,分为亚胺培南西司他丁钠组(治疗组)56例和美罗培南组(对照组)71例,通过治疗后观察两组患者的临床疗效及不良反应发生情况。结果:治疗组和对照组患者治疗有效率分别为32.00%和57.75%,两组比较有显著性差异(P<0.01);治疗组和对照组患者细菌清除率分别为43.33%和65.96%,两组比较无统计学差异(P>0.05);治疗组和对照组不良反应发生率分别为10.71%和15.49%,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:亚胺培南西司他丁钠治疗开颅术后颅内感染疗效次于美罗培南,两组不良反应发生率相当。OBJECTIVE To compare effectiveness and safety of imipenem-cilastatin versus meropenem against intracranial infection after craniotomy.METHODS A total of 127 patients with intracranial infection after craniotomy were enrolled from Neurosurgery Department of a hospital from October 2010 to October 2015,and divided into imipenem-cilastatin group（treatment group）including 56 patients and meropenem group（control group）including 71 patients.Clinical data of patients were reviewed to assess clinical efficacy and adverse effects.RESULTS Overall efficiency rate was 32.00%in treatment group and57.75%in control group,with significant difference between two groups（P〈0.01）.Bacterial eradication rate was 43.33%in treatment group and 65.96%in control group（P〉0.05）.Adverse reaction rate was 10.71% and 15.49%,respectively（P〉0.05）.CONCLUSION Imipenem-cilastatin is less effective than meropenem for treatment against intracranial infection after craniotomy.Two drugs have similar drug-related adverse events.

关 键 词：亚胺培南西司他丁钠 美罗培南 颅内感染 

分 类 号：R969[医药卫生—药理学]