比较美罗培南与亚胺培南西司他丁治疗老年肺部感染患者的临床疗效

Efficacy of Meropenem and Imipenem-Cilastatin in the treatment of elderly patients suffered pulmonary infection

目的对美罗培南与亚胺培南西司他丁治疗老年肺部感染的临床疗效进行分析和探讨。方法以本院2015年7月—2017年6月收治的48例老年肺部感染患者为研究对象,采取随机数表法对患者分组,观察组和对照组各24例,给予观察组患者美罗培南注射治疗,给予对照组患者亚胺培南西司他丁注射治疗,比较两组患者临床治疗效果。结果观察组和对照组两组患者在临床治疗总有效率以及不良反应总发生率的比较上不具有显著差异(95.83%vs 91.67%、12.50%vs 16.67%,P>0.05);但观察组患者体温恢复以及住院所用时间显著短于对照组患者(P<0.05),病原菌清除率显著高于对照组患者(95.83%vs 70.83%,P<0.05)。结论美罗培南与亚胺培南西司他丁治疗老年肺部感染疗效相当,安全可靠,但比较而言,美罗培南见效更快,病原菌清除率更高,推荐使用。

Objective The aim of this study was to analyze and investigate the efficacy and safety of meropenem and imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of elderly patients with pulmonary infection. Methods 48 cases of elderly patients with pulmonary infection were chose as the research object,the patients ever hospitalized in our hospital during July 2015 and June 2017,and they were divided into the observation group and the control group with 24 cases in each group according to the random number table method. Patients in the observation group were given Meropenem injection therapy,while patients in the control group were treated with imipenem-cilastatin injection. The clinical therapeutic effects of the two groups were compared. Results There were no significant difference between observation group and the control group in the total clinical efficiency and the incidence rate of adverse reaction（ 95.83% vs 91.67%,12.50% vs 16.67%,P0.05）. The time needed for temperature recovery and hospitalization time of the observation group were significantly shorter than those in control group（ P0.05）.However,the clear rate of pathogenic bacteria was significantly higher than the control group（ 95. 83% vs 70.83%,P0.05）.Conclusions Meropenem and imipenem-cilastatin are equal in clinical efficacy in the treatment of elderly patients with pulmonary infection,it ＇ s safe and reliable,but relatively speaking,meropenem works faster,and could reach higher pathogen clearance rate,so it is recommended.