论文部分内容阅读
比较头孢哌酮 /舒巴坦 (CPZ/SB)、亚胺培南 /西司他丁 (IPM/CS)与头孢他啶 (CAZ)治疗老年人肺部感染的疗效及其安全性。共入选老年肺部感染患者 10 4例 ,可供评价疗效者 92例 ,其中应用 CPZ/SB30例、IPM/CS30例、CAZ32例 ;12例病例因应用时间不足 3d或因在治疗过程中加用其他抗菌药物而未被列入评价分析。CPZ/SB、CAZ每次 1g,每日 3次 ,疗程 4～ 14d;IPM/CS每次 0 .5 g,其中 18例每日 2次 ,12例每日 3次 ,疗程 7～ 14d。结果 CPZ/SB组有效率 86 .7% ,IPM/CS组有效率 90 % ,CAZ组有效率 81.3% ;对致病菌株的清除率分别为 83%、86 %和 78% ;不良反应发生率分别为 6 .7%、10 %与 9.3%。结论 :老年人发生严重肺部感染时选择 CPZ/SB、IPM/CS、CAZ治疗都是安全有效的。
To compare the efficacy and safety of cefoperazone / sulbactam (CPZ / SB), imipenem / cilastatin (IPM / CS) and ceftazidime (CAZ) in the treatment of pulmonary infections in the elderly. A total of 104 elderly patients with pulmonary infection were enrolled in the evaluation of the efficacy of 92 cases, including the application of CPZ / SB30 cases, IPM / CS30 cases, CAZ32 cases; 12 cases due to lack of application time 3d or because of the treatment process Other antimicrobials were not included in the evaluation. CPZ / SB, CAZ each 1g, 3 times a day, treatment 4 ~ 14d; IPM / CS each 0.5g, of which 18 cases twice daily, 12 cases three times daily for 7 to 14 days. Results The effective rate was 86.7% in CPZ / SB group, 90% in IPM / CS group and 81.3% in CAZ group, and 83%, 86% and 78% in CAZ group respectively. The incidence of adverse reactions Respectively, 6.7%, 10% and 9.3%. Conclusion: It is safe and effective to choose CPZ / SB, IPM / CS and CAZ in elderly patients with severe pulmonary infection.