摘要
目的:比较头孢哌酮与头孢哌酮∕舒巴坦不良反应发生情况,为临床用药提供理论依据。方法:收集因使用头孢哌酮和头孢哌酮∕舒巴坦发生不良反应的323例患者为研究对象,其中头孢哌酮不良反应174例,头孢哌酮∕舒巴坦不良反应149例,比较两组患者的不良反应构成比及转归情况。结果:两种药物的不良反应主要为过敏反应,皮肤及附件损害及胃肠道反应,并且两组患者比较发现不良反应的发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),并且头孢哌酮组患者82.18%的不良反应经过治疗后治愈,头孢哌酮∕舒巴坦发生不良反应的患者82.55%不良反应经过治疗后痊愈,头孢哌酮组和头孢哌酮∕舒巴坦只有4.59%和2.68%的患者不良反应会导致后遗症,两组患者比较差异无明显的统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:头孢哌酮与头孢哌酮/舒巴坦的主要不良反应相似,临床应当根据实际情况进行使用。
Objective To comparatively analyze the adverse reactions of Cefoperazone and cefoperazone / sulbactam, to provide a theo- retical basis for the clinical use of drugs. Method 323 patients with cefoperazone and cefoperazone / sulbactam adverse reactions in our hospital from January 2005 to January 2012 were selected as the research object,in which adverse reactions of cefoperazone were 174 cases, adverse eefoperazone / sulbactam were 149 cases, ratio and the outcome of the situation of the adverse reaetions in the two groups were com- pared. Results The major adverse reactions of eefoperazone and eefoperazone / sulbactam were allergic reactions ,damage to the skin and its appendages,gastrointestinal reactions. The incidence of adverse reactions in two groups＇ patients was no slgnifieant statistical difference （P 〉0. 05）. And 82. 18% adverse reaction of the cefoperazone group and 82. 55% of adverse reactions of cefoperazone / sulbactam group were healed after treatment. Only 4. 59% and 2.68% of eefoperazone group and cefoperazone / sulbaetam had cause sequelae by adverse reactions in patients. The difference was not statistically significant （ P 〉 0. 05 ）. Conclusion The major adverse reactions of cefoperazone and cefoperazone / sulbactam were similar. The clinical use should be based on the actual situation-
出处
《吉林医学》
CAS
2013年第25期5114-5115,共2页
Jilin Medical Journal
