Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of domestic cefepime in the treatment of acute bacterial lower respiratory tract infection.
Methods A randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical trial was performed. The positive control was imported cefepime. The dosages of cefepime were 1g for moderate infection and 2g for severe infection, twice a day intravenously. The duration of the treatment was 7-10 days.
Results Thirty-one patients were enrolled in the trial, of whom 30 were evaluable (15 in the triagroup and 15 in the control group). No significant differences were observed between the trial group and the control group with respect to the cure rate (40% vs. 27%), the effective rate (80% vs. 87%), the bacterial clearance rate (92% vs. 100%), and the incidence of adverse drug reactions (12.5% vs. 13%) (P gt;0.05).
Conclusion Domestic cefepime injection is effective and safe in the treatment of acute bacterial lower respiratory tract infection.
Citation：
WANG Lichun,LI Dajiang,LV Xiaoju,ZONG Zhiyong,LU Jiaxiu,YU Rujia,NI Zongzan. Domestic Cefepime Injection for Acute Bacterial Lower Respiratory Tract Infection: A Randomized Single-blind Controlled Clinical Trial. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2007, 07(8): 580-585. doi:
Copy
Copyright © the editorial department of Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved
| 1. |
Liu HX, Wang T, Zhang H, et al. A multicenter, randomized, and double-blind controlled clinical trial of cefepime in treatment of acute bacterial infections. Chin J New Drugs Clin Rem, 2006, 25(7): 515-518.
|
| 2. |
Liu LL, Zhang LP, Jiang SL. Adverse effect of cefepime. Chin J Misdiagn, 2006, 6(13): 2640.
|
| 3. |
Bijie H, Kulpradist S, Manalaysay M, et al. In vitro activity, phamocokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety and phamocoeconomics of ceftriaxone compared with third and forth generation cephalosporins: review. J Chemother, 2005, 17(1): 3-24.
|
| 4. |
Karlowsky JA, Jones ME, Thomsberry C, et al. Trends in antimicrobial susceptibilities among Enterobacteriaceae isolated from hospitalized patients in the United States from 1998 to 2002. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2003, 47(5): 1672-1680.
|
| 5. |
刘惠侠, 王婷, 张虹, 等. 头孢吡肟治疗急性细菌性感染多中心随机双盲对照临床研究. 中国新药与临床杂志, 2006, 25(7): 515-518.
|
| 6. |
刘丽岚, 张丽萍, 江素玲. 头孢吡肟不良反应. 中国误诊学杂志, 2006, 6(13): 2640.
|
- 1. Liu HX, Wang T, Zhang H, et al. A multicenter, randomized, and double-blind controlled clinical trial of cefepime in treatment of acute bacterial infections. Chin J New Drugs Clin Rem, 2006, 25(7): 515-518.
- 2. Liu LL, Zhang LP, Jiang SL. Adverse effect of cefepime. Chin J Misdiagn, 2006, 6(13): 2640.
- 3. Bijie H, Kulpradist S, Manalaysay M, et al. In vitro activity, phamocokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety and phamocoeconomics of ceftriaxone compared with third and forth generation cephalosporins: review. J Chemother, 2005, 17(1): 3-24.
- 4. Karlowsky JA, Jones ME, Thomsberry C, et al. Trends in antimicrobial susceptibilities among Enterobacteriaceae isolated from hospitalized patients in the United States from 1998 to 2002. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2003, 47(5): 1672-1680.
- 5. 刘惠侠, 王婷, 张虹, 等. 头孢吡肟治疗急性细菌性感染多中心随机双盲对照临床研究. 中国新药与临床杂志, 2006, 25(7): 515-518.
- 6. 刘丽岚, 张丽萍, 江素玲. 头孢吡肟不良反应. 中国误诊学杂志, 2006, 6(13): 2640.
