Deutsch
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Japanese Journal of Antibiotics 1983-Jan

[A double blind clinical trial of cefamandole and cefmetazole in complicated urinary tract infections].

Nur registrierte Benutzer können Artikel übersetzen
Einloggen Anmelden
Der Link wird in der Zwischenablage gespeichert
M Ohkawa
S Hirano
T Nakashima
S Tokunaga
I Motoi
K Kuroda
T Nakamura
Y Iwasa
E Tajika
A Sakai

Schlüsselwörter

Abstrakt

We conducted a randomized double blind comparison of cefamandole (CMD) and cefmetazole (CMZ) in the treatment of 193 patients with complicated urinary tract infections. The patients received 1 gram of CMD or CMZ twice a day intravenously by drip infusion over 1 hour for 5 days. Pretreatment urinary leukocyte counts and urinary bacterial counts were at least 5 cells/hpf and 10(4) bacteria/ml, respectively. Each patient was randomly allocated either to CMD or CMZ group. There were 93 patients in CMD group and 100 patients in CMZ group. Clinical efficacy was evaluated based on the effect of treatment on bacteriuria and pyuria according to the criteria set by the UTI Committee, Japan. The response to CMD treatment was excellent in 18 cases (19.4%), moderate in 38 cases (40.9%) and poor in 37 cases (39.8%) with an overall effectiveness of 60.2%, whereas the response to CMZ was excellent in 19 cases (19.0%), moderate in 40 cases (40.0%) and poor in 41 cases (41.0%) with an overall effectiveness of 59.0%. No statistical significant difference was found between 2 treatment groups. Comparison of the bacteriological response between 2 groups showed that the eradication rate for strains of Gram-positive cocci were significantly higher in those patients treated with CMD. Gram-negative rods were eradicated from 68.4% of cases treated with CMD, and 78.0% of those with CMZ, but the difference was not significant. Adverse reactions were observed in 3 patients receiving CMD 1 case each of diarrhea, eruption and epigastric pain. Abnormality in laboratory tests was found in 6 patients in each treatment group. The results indicate that CMD is effective, safe and useful in the treatment of patients with complicated urinary tract infections, and its efficacy, safety and usefulness are comparable with those of CMZ.

Treten Sie unserer
Facebook-Seite bei

Die vollständigste Datenbank für Heilkräuter, die von der Wissenschaft unterstützt wird

  • Arbeitet in 55 Sprachen
  • Von der Wissenschaft unterstützte Kräuterkuren
  • Kräutererkennung durch Bild
  • Interaktive GPS-Karte - Kräuter vor Ort markieren (in Kürze)
  • Lesen Sie wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen zu Ihrer Suche
  • Suchen Sie nach Heilkräutern nach ihrer Wirkung
  • Organisieren Sie Ihre Interessen und bleiben Sie über Neuigkeiten, klinische Studien und Patente auf dem Laufenden

Geben Sie ein Symptom oder eine Krankheit ein und lesen Sie über Kräuter, die helfen könnten, geben Sie ein Kraut ein und sehen Sie Krankheiten und Symptome, gegen die es angewendet wird.
* Alle Informationen basieren auf veröffentlichten wissenschaftlichen Forschungsergebnissen

Google Play badgeApp Store badge