摘要
目的观察替考拉宁经验治疗耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌（MRS）肺炎的临床效果及安全性，并对经验治疗的合理性作出评价。方法采用回顾性队列研究，收集医院2007年1月～2008年11月使用替考拉宁治疗MRS肺炎住院患者110例，110例患者分为两组：经验治疗组65例，确定为MRS感染后，立即应用替考拉宁治疗；目标治疗组45例，待细菌培养确定为MRS感染后再选用替考拉宁治疗，剂量与用法与经验治疗组相同。结果两组有效率分别为78．50％、73．30％（P=0．53）；不良反应发生率分别为7．70％、8．90％（P=0．97），两组对比差异无统计学意义；两组治疗3d与7d评分降低程度及治疗时间对比差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；对于高危人群，经验治疗组有效率明显高于目标治疗组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论替考拉宁可以作为MRS所致肺炎的经验用药，可以较快的缓解症状，缩短治疗时间，尤其是针对高危人群肺炎患者，疗效确切，安全性较高。
OBJECTIVE To observe the efficacy and safety of teicoplanin in the empirical treatment of pneumonia due to meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus （MRS） and to evaluate the rationality of empirical treatment. METHODS In a retrospective cohort study, 110 hospitalized patients with pneumonia by MRS including MRSA and MRCNS while receiving teicoplanin in our hospital from Jan 2007 to Nov 2008 were assigned to two groups： 65 cases in empirical treatment group; 45 cases in target treatment group. There was no significant difference between two groups in age, sex, smokers,CAP/hospital-acquired pneumonia （HAP） ,severe pneumonia, MRSA/ MRCNS, severeness score, and underlying diseases. RESULTS In empirical group and objective group, the effective rate and the adverse effect rate were 78.50% vs 73.30%（P=0.53）;7.70% vs 8.90% （P=0.97）, respectively. There was no significant difference between two groups （P〉0.05）. There was significant difference in time of treatment and severeness score after three days and seven days （P〈0. 05）. The empirical group had a better effective rate than objective group in patients with high risk factors. There was significant difference in statistics （P=0. 025）. CONCLUSIONS Teicoplanin can be used as empirical treatment for pneumonia due to MRS,and it is effective and safe. Empirical treatment with teicoplanin can relieve symptoms rapidly and reduce the time of treatment, especially to high risk group.
出处
《中华医院感染学杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2010年第1期95-97,共3页
Chinese Journal of Nosocomiology
