3种奥硝唑用药方案治疗慢性盆腔炎的疗效与安全性比较
发布时间：2018-12-11 11:33
【摘要】：目的:比较3种奥硝唑用药方案治疗慢性盆腔炎(PID)的疗效和安全性。方法:120例慢性PID患者随机分为奥硝唑组(40例)、联用左氧氟沙星组(40例)和联用头孢地尼组(40例)。在常规治疗的基础上,奥硝唑组患者口服奥硝唑片0.5 g,每日早晚1次;联用左氧氟沙星组患者在奥硝唑组治疗的基础上口服盐酸左氧氟沙星片0.1 g,每日3次;联用头孢地尼组患者在奥硝唑组治疗的基础上口服头孢地尼分散片0.1 g,每日3次。3组疗程均为10 d。观察3组患者的临床疗效,治疗前后血浆黏度、红细胞压积、C反应蛋白(CRP)、白细胞介素1(IL-1)、白细胞计数、淋巴细胞计数、淋巴细胞百分比及不良反应发生情况。结果:总有效率头孢地尼组(95.00%)左氧氟沙星组(82.50%)奥硝唑组(62.50%),差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。治疗前,3组患者血浆黏度、红细胞压积、CRP、IL-1、白细胞计数、淋巴细胞计数、淋巴细胞百分比比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05);治疗后,3组患者上述指标均显著低于同组治疗前,且联用头孢地尼组联用左氧氟沙星组奥硝唑组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。联用左氧氟沙星组患者不良反应发生率显著高于奥硝唑组和联用头孢地尼组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05);但奥硝唑组和联用头孢地尼组比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:在常规治疗的基础上,奥硝唑联合头孢地尼治疗慢性PID的疗效显著优于奥硝唑联合左氧氟沙星和单用奥硝唑,且安全性与单用奥硝唑相近。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the efficacy and safety of three ornidazole regimens in the treatment of chronic pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Methods: 120 patients with chronic PID were randomly divided into ornidazole group (n = 40), levofloxacin group (n = 40) and cefdinil group (n = 40). On the basis of routine treatment, ornidazole group was given ornidazole tablet 0.5 g once a day, and levofloxacin group was given levofloxacin hydrochloride 0.1 g, 3 times a day, on the basis of ornidazole group. The patients in cefdinil group were treated with ornidazole on the basis of oral cefdinil dispersible tablets 0.1 g, 3 times a day. The course of treatment in the three groups was 10 days. The clinical efficacy, plasma viscosity, hematocrit, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 1 (IL-1), leukocyte count and lymphocyte count were observed before and after treatment. Percentage of lymphocytes and occurrence of adverse reactions. Results: the total effective rate of cefdinil group (95.00%), levofloxacin group (82.50%) and ornidazole group (62.50%) were significantly different (P0.05). Before treatment, there was no significant difference in plasma viscosity, hematocrit, CRP,IL-1, white blood cell count and lymphocyte percentage between the three groups (P0.05). After treatment, the above indexes of the three groups were significantly lower than those of the same group before treatment, and the combined use of cefodil combined with levofloxacin group ornidazole group, the differences were statistically significant (P0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in combination with levofloxacin group was significantly higher than that in ornidazole group and cefdinil group (P0.05). There was no significant difference between ornidazole group and cefdinil group (P0.05). Conclusion: the efficacy of ornidazole combined with cefdinil in the treatment of chronic PID is better than ornidazole combined with levofloxacin and ornidazole alone and the safety is similar to that of ornidazole alone.
【作者单位】： 南京医科大学附属淮安第一医院;
【分类号】：R711.33
本文编号：2372474
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the efficacy and safety of three ornidazole regimens in the treatment of chronic pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Methods: 120 patients with chronic PID were randomly divided into ornidazole group (n = 40), levofloxacin group (n = 40) and cefdinil group (n = 40). On the basis of routine treatment, ornidazole group was given ornidazole tablet 0.5 g once a day, and levofloxacin group was given levofloxacin hydrochloride 0.1 g, 3 times a day, on the basis of ornidazole group. The patients in cefdinil group were treated with ornidazole on the basis of oral cefdinil dispersible tablets 0.1 g, 3 times a day. The course of treatment in the three groups was 10 days. The clinical efficacy, plasma viscosity, hematocrit, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 1 (IL-1), leukocyte count and lymphocyte count were observed before and after treatment. Percentage of lymphocytes and occurrence of adverse reactions. Results: the total effective rate of cefdinil group (95.00%), levofloxacin group (82.50%) and ornidazole group (62.50%) were significantly different (P0.05). Before treatment, there was no significant difference in plasma viscosity, hematocrit, CRP,IL-1, white blood cell count and lymphocyte percentage between the three groups (P0.05). After treatment, the above indexes of the three groups were significantly lower than those of the same group before treatment, and the combined use of cefodil combined with levofloxacin group ornidazole group, the differences were statistically significant (P0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in combination with levofloxacin group was significantly higher than that in ornidazole group and cefdinil group (P0.05). There was no significant difference between ornidazole group and cefdinil group (P0.05). Conclusion: the efficacy of ornidazole combined with cefdinil in the treatment of chronic PID is better than ornidazole combined with levofloxacin and ornidazole alone and the safety is similar to that of ornidazole alone.
【作者单位】： 南京医科大学附属淮安第一医院;
【分类号】：R711.33
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 贾萍;奥硝唑在妇科临床中的应用[J];成都医药;2004年01期
2 陈冰心;;奥硝唑和替硝唑治疗妇产科厌氧菌感染的临床对照研究[J];广州医药;2007年01期
3 郝玉凤;王茜;袁晓洁;王丽萍;卢战凯;;左奥硝唑、奥硝唑、替硝唑治疗盆腔炎临床对比研究[J];中国性科学;2012年08期
4 王红云;;奥硝唑与甲硝唑治疗滴虫性阴道炎的疗效观察[J];临床合理用药杂志;2014年15期
5 苏凌春,兰顺,马刚;奥硝唑在母乳中的药物动力学及合理哺乳时间[J];中华围产医学杂志;2004年01期
6 李楚梅;;头孢他啶、奥硝唑联合中药灌肠治疗慢性盆腔炎的疗效观察[J];求医问药(下半月);2012年04期
7 伍雨莲;;奥硝唑预防剖宫产术后感染200例临床观察[J];海南医学;2009年S4期
8 张秀晏;刘小丽;王华;;观察奥硝唑治疗滴虫性阴道炎的临床疗效及不良反应[J];中国继续医学教育;2014年04期
9 吴海霞;;LEEP刀手术联合奥硝唑栓治疗宫颈病变的疗效观察[J];中外医学研究;2011年33期
10 吴江;路锦;;盐酸左氧氟沙星、奥硝唑配合微波治疗慢性盆腔炎92例[J];陕西医学杂志;2012年08期
，本文编号：2372474
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/fuchankeerkelunwen/2372474.html
最近更新
教材专著
