【摘要】 目的 系统评价司帕沙星对比氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核的有效性和安全性。 方法 计算机检索Cochrane图书馆临床对照试验资料库（2010年第2期）和PubMed（1978年-2010年10月）、EMBASE（1974年-2010年10月）、中国学术期刊网络出版总库（1978年-2010年10月）、维普（1989年-2010年10月）、中国生物医学文献数据库（1978年-2010年10月）；手工检索其他相关杂志。检索语种为中文和英文。纳入司帕沙星对比氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核的随机对照试验。按Cochrane系统评价的方法评价纳入研究质量，用RevMan 5.0软件对数据进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入8篇研究，Meta分析结果显示司帕沙星组与氧氟沙星组相比，痰菌转阴率、病灶显著吸收率、空洞闭合率均高于对照组，差异具有统计学意义（Plt;0.05）。 结论 现有的证据表明，司帕沙星与其他抗结核药物联用治疗难治、耐多药肺结核的疗效优于氧氟沙星的联用方案，但由于纳入的文献数量有限，质量参差不齐，存在潜在的发表偏倚。【Abstract】 Objective To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of sparfloxacin versus ofloxacin in treatment of multi-drug resistant pulmonary tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Methods Literatures were retrieved from PubMed (1978-October, 2010), EMBASE (1974-October 2010), Cochrane library (2nd volume, 2010), China Academic Journal Network Publishing Database (1978-October, 2010), VIP (1989-October, 2010) and CBM (1978 to October, 2010) by computer, and searched some other relevant journals manually. Chinese and English were both used in the search. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on sparfloxacin versus ofloxacin in treating pulmonary tuberculosis were included in this study. Meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.0 software. Results The meta-analysis of 8 included RCTs showed that the sputum negative conversion rate, focus absorption rate, cavity closure rate in the sparfloxacin group were significantly higher than the ofloxacin group (P＜0.05). Conclusions The analysis indicates that combined treatment with sparfloxacin has a better effect in treating MDR-TB than with ofloxacin. However, the reliability of this review may be affected by the number and quality of studies included. Large-scale randomized controlled trials of high quality are needed to confirm the conclusions above.
Objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of moxifloxacin versus levofloxacin for the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Methods Such databases as PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI and VIP were electronically searched, and the relevant conference proceedings were also hand-searched. The search time was up to July, 2011. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on moxifloxacin versus levofloxacin for AECOPD were included. Literature was screened according to inclusive and exclusive criteria, data were extracted, quality was assessed, and then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0. Results A total of 6 RCTs involving 482 patients with AECOPD were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that moxifloxacin group was significantly superior to levofloxacin group in the effective rate (OR=3.15, 95%CI 1.80 to 5.49, Plt;0.000 1). The bacterial clearance rate in moxifloxacin group was also higher than that in the levofloxacin group (OR=2.79, 95%CI 1.30 to 5.97, P=0.008). In addition, adverse effects of moxifloxacin group were less than levofloxacin (OR=0.48, 95%CI 0.24 to 0.98, P=0.04). Conclusion Based on current studies, moxifloxacin is superior to levofloxacin in improving effective rate and bacterial clearance rate, and in lowering side effects when treating AECOPD. Hence it is considerable to use moxifloxacin instead of levofloxacin in the treatment of AECOPD if necessary. Due to the limitation of both quantity and quality of included studies, this conclusion should be further confirmed with more high quality and large sample studies.
Objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of prulifloxacin in the treatment of urinary tract infection. Methods The double-blind, double dummy and randomized controlled method was adopted. One hundred and forty-four patients were randomized to the treatment group (prulifloxacin , 4 tablets, bid) and the control group (levofloxacin, 4 tablets, bid). The randomization code was produced by computer. The treatment duration for both groups was from 7 to 10 days. Results Data were analyzed on the basis of full analysis sets (FAS) and per-protocol (PP) analysis. The total improvement rates of the trial and control groups were 85.07% and 88.52% respectively by FAS analysis, and 90.48% and 91.53% respectively by PP analysis. There was no significant difference between the two groups in improvement rates (Pgt;0.05). Bacterial negative rates in the trial and control groups were 93.75% and 93.88% respectively by FAS analysis and 97.83% and 97.87% respectively by PP analysis. The results showed no statistical significance difference between the two groups in bacterial negative rates (Pgt;0.05). The adverse events in the prulifloxacin and levofloxacin groups were 2.80% and 5.60% respectively. Conclusion Prulifloxacin has the same clinical effectiveness as levofloxacin with a few toxic adverse effects in the treatment of urinary tract infection.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and side-effects of levofloxacin-based triple therapy as rescue regimen for Helicobacter pylori, and to compare it with the quadruple therapy. MethodsScience Direct, PubMed, Medline, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI, developed by Chongqing VIP Company), and Wanfang Database were electronically searched from January 2000 to September 2013. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were focused on the eradication rate and adverse effects of levofloxacin-based regimens and generally recommended quadruple therapy after failure to eradicate Helicobacter pylori for one or more times. Two reviewers independently screened studies according to exclusion and inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software. ResultsFourteen literatures involving 1 402 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that the levofloxacin-based group was better than the quadruple therapy group [RR=1.16, 95%CI (1.04, 1.30), P=0.009]. In addition, the adverse effects of levofloxacin group was less than the quadruple therapy group[OR=0.44, 95%CI (0.24, 0.81), P=0.008]. ConclusionAfter the failure of eradication of Helicobacter pylori, levofloxacin-based rescue regimen is more effective and better tolerated than the generally recommended quadruple therapy.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Levofloxacin combined with Cefoperazone/Sulbactam on the patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia ( VAP) . Methods The clinical effect of Levofloxacin combined with Cefoperazone/ Sulbactam on ventilator-associated pneumonia in 58 paitiens with VAP were retrospectively analyzed. Results 26 patients ( 44. 8% ) were cured, 18 patients( 31. 1% ) were marked improved, and 14 patients ( 24. 1% ) were ineffective. The total clinical efficacy rate was 75. 9% . 55 strains of bacteria were isolated, and Gram-negative bacilli were dominant pathogens( 78. 2% ) . The bacterial clearance rate was 78. 2% . The prevalence of adverse reaction was 5. 1% . Conclusion Levofloxacin combined with Cefoperazone/ Sulbactam is effective and safe for patients with VAP.
This research was aimed to find the skin irritation and burns treatment effect of wound dressing with microspheres containing levofloxacin. We used reference GB/T16886.10-2005 to evaluate the dressing skin irritation. We prepared rabbit models divided into three groups. The control group was rapped with Vaseline gauze bandage, while the positive control group was rapped with the wounds of nano-silver paste bandage. The experimental sample group was rapped with wound dressing with microspheres containing levofloxacin. We measured the wound without healing area and the hydroxyproline content at the ends of 3 d, 6 d, 9 d, 14 d, 21 d, 28 d. and meanwhile performed histopathological examination. The experimental results showed that the dressing primary irritation index was 0. The nonhealing wound area of theexperimental sample group and positive control group at the ends of 6 d, 9 d, 14 d, 21 d were less than that of the control group (P<0.05). The nonhealing wound area of the experimental sample group at the ends of 9 d and 14 d was significantly lower than that of the positive control group (P<0.05). The hydroxyproline content of the experimental sample group at the ends of 6 d, 9 d and 14 d was significantly higher than that of the positive control group and blank control group (P<0.05). The pathology observed of the experimental sample group at 21 d were the earliest appendages. The wound dressing with microspheres containing levofloxacin has minimal skin irritation, effectively promote wound healing of burn.
Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of sparfioxacin in treatment of the acute respiratory tract infections. Methods A randomized-controlled clinical trial was carried out. Sparfloxaein 200 mg once daily and ofioxacin, as a control drug, 200 mg twice a day, both drugs were given by infusion for 7-14 days. There were 30 cases in each group. Results The clinical cure rates and the clinical efficacy rates of the two groups were 33.33%, 26.67%, and 80.00%, 76.67 % respectively. The bacterial clearance rates were 89.66% and 89.29% respectively. The adverse drug reaction rates were 13.33% and 16.67% respectively. There were no statistical differences between the two groups (Pgt;0.05). Photosensitive reaction was not observed in this study. Conclusion Sparfloxacin was effective in the treatment of the respiratory infections.
【摘要】 目的 探讨肝炎后肝硬化自发性细菌性腹膜炎（spontaneous bacterial peritonitis，SBP）的诊疗情况及头孢哌酮舒巴坦联合左旋氧氟沙星对SBP的治疗效果。 方法 对2004年1月-2009年12月收治的54例肝炎后肝硬化SBP患者，应用头孢哌酮舒巴坦联合左旋氧氟沙星给与治疗，并观察分析治疗效果。 结果 肝炎后肝硬化SBP的临床表现以发热，腹痛为主，具有典型腹膜刺激征的不足半数。外周血白细胞升高者不多见，腹腔积液中白细胞计数、PMN计数和细菌培养是自发性细菌性腹膜炎的重要诊断指标。 结论 肝炎后肝硬化合并SBP的临床表现不典型。致病菌以G-杆菌为主。在早期诊断、综合治疗的基础上，头孢哌酮舒巴坦联合左旋氧氟沙星对自发性细菌性腹膜炎的治疗效果显著。【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the diagnosis and treatment of post-hepatitis cirrhosis complicated with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) cases and the efficacy of cefoperazone and sulbactam combined with levofloxacin in the treatment of cirrhotic patients with SBP. Methods From January 2004 to December 2009, the clinical data from 54 cases of SBP after cirrhosis were analyzed. The patients underwent the treatment of cefoperazone sulbactam combined with levofloxacin. The therapeutic effect was observed. Results The main clinical manifestations were fever and abdominal pain, and about half of the patients had the typical peritoneal irritation. Only a few patients had elevated peripheral white blood cells (WBC). The WBC count, abdominal effusion polymorphonuclearcyte count and bacteria cultivation were the indexes of diagnosis of SBP. Conclusion The clinical features of post-hepatitis cirrhosis complicated with SBP are not typical. The main pathogenic bacteria is G- bacilli. In the early diagnosis and treatment, cefoperazone sulbactam combined with levofloxacin is effective.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the bone repair efficacy of the new nano-hydroxyapatite (n-HA)/polyurethane (PU) composite scaffold in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis in tibia.MethodsA novel levofloxacin@mesoporous silica microspheres (Lev@MSNs)/n-HA/PU was successfully synthesized. Its surface structure was observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Fifty adult female New Zealand rabbits were randomly selected, and osteomyelitis was induced in the right tibia of the rabbit by injecting bacterial suspension (Staphylococcus aureus; 3×107 CFU/mL), which of the method was described by Norden. A total of 45 animals with the evidence of osteomyelitis were randomly divided into 4 groups, and the right medullary cavity of each animal was exposed. Animals in the blank control group (group A, n=9) were treated with exhaustive debridement only. The remaining animals were first treated by exhaustive debridement, and received implantations of 5 mg Lev@PMMA (group B, n=12), 1 mg Lev@MSNs/n-HA/PU (group C, n=12), and 5 mg Lev@MSNs/n-HA/PU (group D, n=12), respectively. At 12 weeks postoperatively, the right tibia of rabbits were observed by X-ray film, and then gross observation, methylene blue/acid fuchsin staining, and SEM observation of implant-bone interface, as well as biomechanical test (measuring the maximal compression force) were performed.ResultsX-ray films showed that the infection were severer than those of preoperation in group A, while the control of inflammation and bone healing of rabbits in group D were obviously better than those at preoperation. The gross observation showed extensive bone destruction in group A, a significant gap between bone tissue and the material in groups B and C, and close combination between bone tissue and the material in group D. The histology of the resected specimens showed that there was no obvious new bone formation around the materials in groups B and C, and there was abundant new bone formation around the periphery and along the voids of the materials and active bone remodeling in group D. The SEM observation of the bone-implant interface demonstrated that no new bone formation was observed at the bone-implant interface in groups B and C. However, bony connections and blurred boundaries were observed between the material and host bone tissue in group D. The biomechanical test showed the maximal compression force of groups B and D were significantly higher than that of groups A and C (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between groups B and D (P>0.05).ConclusionThe novel synthetic composite Lev@MSNs/n-HA/PU exhibit good antibacterial activities, osteoconductivity, and biomechanical properties, and show great potential in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis of rabbits.