左氧氟沙星不同给药方案治疗成人社区获得性肺炎的疗效比较

Comparison of the efficacy between different dosing regimens of levofloxacin in the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia

目的 :比较左氧氟沙星不同给药方案治疗成人社区获得性肺炎的疗效和安全性。方法 :选取我院呼吸科收治的成人社区获得性肺炎(CAP)患者134例,随机分为序贯组(n=69)和静脉组(n=65),分别给予左氧氟沙星静脉滴注-口服序贯治疗和左氧氟沙星单纯静脉滴注,比较两组患者临床疗效、细菌清除率、临床症状恢复正常时间及不良反应发生情况。结果 :序贯组痊愈率、总有效率及细菌清除率分别为66.67%、91.30%和84.62%,静脉组分别为64.62%、87.69%和83.33%,两组患者比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者体温、咳嗽、咯痰、肺部啰音、胸部X线检查结果等恢复正常时间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);序贯组患者不良反应发生率为8.70%,静脉组患者为23.08%(P<0.05)。结论 :左氧氟沙星静脉组滴注-口服序贯治疗成人CAP患者的疗效与单纯静脉滴注相仿,但安全性较单纯静脉滴注高,值得临床推广。

Objective： To compare the efficacy and safety between different dosing regimens of levofloxacin in the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia（CAP）. Methods： One hundred and thirty-four cases of patients with CAP were selected and randomly divided into a sequential group（n=69, received levofloxacin intravenous-oral sequential therapy） and an intravenous group（n=65, received single intravenous levofloxacin）. The clinical efficacy, the bacterial clearance rate, the recovery time of clinical symptoms and the incidence of adverse reaction were compared between two groups. Results： The cure rate, total efficiency rate and bacterial clearance rate were 66.67%, 91.30% and 84.62% in the sequential group and 64.62%, 87.69% and 83.33% in the intravenous group, respectively（P〉0.05）. There were no significant differences in the recovery time of clinical symptoms between two groups（P〉0.05）. The incidence of adverse reaction was significantly lower in the sequential group than in the intravenous group（P〈0.05）. Conclusion： Levofloxacin intravenous-oral sequential therapy for the treatment of patients with CAP is at least as effective and well tolerated as the intravenous infusion, however, its safety is higher and is worthy of promotion.