论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析比阿培南与亚胺培南-西司他丁钠对急性细菌性感染患者抗感染和细菌清除的效果。方法:选取204年1月—2015年12月间收治的急性细菌性感染患者260例,采用多中心随机开放平行对照研究方法,将其随机分为对照组130例和观察组130例;对照组患者给予亚胺培南-西司他丁钠治疗,观察组患者在对照组基础上加用比阿培南治疗,比较两组患者治疗后的临床疗效和细菌清除率。结果:经治疗,观察组患者临床痊愈率为54.62%,总有效率为83.08%和细菌清除率为93.85%,高于对照组分别为51.54%,总有效率为81.54%和细菌清除率为92.54%,两组患者的临床痊愈率、总有效率以及细菌清除率经组间比较均差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);对照组患者用药期间不良反应的发生率为16.15%,观察组为12.31%,经组间比较其差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:采用比阿培南治疗急性细菌感染患者,与亚胺培南-西司他丁钠比较,其临床疗效相近,均可作为首选用药。
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy of biapenem and imipenem-cilastatin sodium against infection and bacterial clearance in patients with acute bacterial infections. Methods: Two hundred and sixty patients with acute bacterial infection who were admitted between January 204 and December 2015 were selected and randomly divided into control group (130 cases) and observation group (130 cases). The control group The patients were given imipenem-cilastatin sodium. The patients in the observation group were treated with biapenem on the basis of the control group. The clinical efficacy and bacterial clearance after treatment were compared between the two groups. Results: After treatment, the clinical cure rate was 54.62% in the observation group, the total effective rate was 83.08% and the bacterial clearance rate was 93.85%, higher than the control group were 51.54%, the total effective rate was 81.54% and the bacterial clearance rate was 92.54 %, The two groups of patients clinical cure rate, total effective rate and bacterial clearance rate between the two groups were no significant difference (P> 0.05); control group patients during the adverse reaction rate was 16.15%, the observation group Was 12.31%. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusion: Biapenem in patients with acute bacterial infection, compared with imipenem - cilastatin sodium, the clinical efficacy of similar, can be used as the preferred drug.