司帕沙星与左氧氟沙星治疗尿路感染的临床疗效研究

Sparfloxacin vs. Levofloxacin for Urinary Tract Infection: Clinical Observation

目的:研究司帕沙星与左氧氟沙星治疗敏感性细菌引起的尿道感染的疗效及安全性。方法:在86例受试者中进行了随机、对照试验。治疗组(A组)44例,单纯性尿路感染每日给予司帕沙星200mg,po,qd,7d;对照组(B组)42例,单纯性尿路感染每日给予左氧氟沙星胶囊200mg,po,bid,7d。结果:A组用药后痊愈26例,显效13例,进步4例,无效1例,有效率为88.64%,痊愈率为59.1%,细菌学清除率86.5.0%;B组痊愈24例,显效12例,进步4例,无效2例,有效率为85.71%,痊愈率为57.1%,细菌学清除率85.2%。2组间疗效比较,差异无显著意义(P>0.05);2组不良反应发生率分别为11.36%和9.52%(P>0.05)。结论:司帕沙星治疗泌尿道感染疗效及安全性与左氧氟沙星相似,是治疗单纯性尿路感染的有效药物。

OBJECTIVE： To study the clinical efficacy and safety of Sparfloxacin vs. Levofloxacin in the treatment of simple urinary tract infection. METHODS： A total of 86 patients with simple urinary tract infection were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial： the trial group （group A, n = 44） were assigned to orally take Sparfloxacin qd for 7d, and the control group （group B, n = 42） to orally take levofloxacin 200mg bid for 7d. RESULTS： Numbers of cases with recovery, excellent efficacy, improvement, and inefficacy and the effective rate, recovery rate, and clearance rate of bacteria in group A were 26,13,4,1,88.64 %, 59.1%, and 86.5.0 %, respectively, and those for group B were 24,12,4,2,85.71%, 57.1%, and 85.2 %, respectively. There were no significant differences between two groups （ P 〉 0.05）. The incidences of adverse effects of group A vs. group B were 11.36% vs. 9.52% （P 〉 0.05）. CONCLUSION： Sparfloxacin is effective for simple urinary tract infection with curative efficacy and safety similar to those of levofloxacin.