头孢噻肟与头孢曲松治疗早产胎膜早破的比较

S. Rasti, M. Rochmanti, R. Y. Primariawan
{"title":"头孢噻肟与头孢曲松治疗早产胎膜早破的比较","authors":"S. Rasti, M. Rochmanti, R. Y. Primariawan","doi":"10.3823/839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Antibiotics are well known and recommended as the main therapy for preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM.) But the research on antibiotics other than the recommended macrolides regimens is still lacking. This research aims to evaluate whether there are effects differences of cefotaxime and ceftriaxone given on pregnancy with PPROM by comparing the duration of the latency period and the infants outcomes. \nMaterial and Methods: Data was taken retrospectively through medical records at Dr. Soetomo Surabaya General Hospital, Indonesia during the period of January-December 2017. The inclusion criteria were a history of PPROM in pregnancy <37 weeks, given cefotaxime or ceftriaxone therapy, and have labor data. The analysis was performed by the Mann-Whitney comparison test for the latency period and Fisher's exact test for infant outcomes. \nResults: There were 52 samples obtained. The antibiotics used were cefotaxime 3x1gr (A) and ceftriaxone 2x1gr (B). The results of the analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the types of antibiotics with the length of the latency period, with a value of p = 0,601 (p>0,05), where group A had a median of 52,67 hours and group B was 34,17 hours. Group A was found to be more able to extend the latency period for >48 hours with a percentage of 57,8%, whereas in group B only 42,9%. There are no significant differences in infant outcomes; infant birth weight and Apgar score among the two therapies used. \nConclusion: Cefotaxime was more preferably to be used in the Dr. Soetomo Surabaya General Hospital. Nevertheless, ceftriaxone can still be a good choice for PPROM therapy since both cephalosporins have succeeded in preventing infections in women with PPROM.","PeriodicalId":22518,"journal":{"name":"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cefotaxime vs Ceftriaxone for the Management of Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes\",\"authors\":\"S. Rasti, M. Rochmanti, R. Y. Primariawan\",\"doi\":\"10.3823/839\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Antibiotics are well known and recommended as the main therapy for preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM.) But the research on antibiotics other than the recommended macrolides regimens is still lacking. This research aims to evaluate whether there are effects differences of cefotaxime and ceftriaxone given on pregnancy with PPROM by comparing the duration of the latency period and the infants outcomes. \\nMaterial and Methods: Data was taken retrospectively through medical records at Dr. Soetomo Surabaya General Hospital, Indonesia during the period of January-December 2017. The inclusion criteria were a history of PPROM in pregnancy <37 weeks, given cefotaxime or ceftriaxone therapy, and have labor data. The analysis was performed by the Mann-Whitney comparison test for the latency period and Fisher's exact test for infant outcomes. \\nResults: There were 52 samples obtained. The antibiotics used were cefotaxime 3x1gr (A) and ceftriaxone 2x1gr (B). The results of the analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the types of antibiotics with the length of the latency period, with a value of p = 0,601 (p>0,05), where group A had a median of 52,67 hours and group B was 34,17 hours. Group A was found to be more able to extend the latency period for >48 hours with a percentage of 57,8%, whereas in group B only 42,9%. There are no significant differences in infant outcomes; infant birth weight and Apgar score among the two therapies used. \\nConclusion: Cefotaxime was more preferably to be used in the Dr. Soetomo Surabaya General Hospital. Nevertheless, ceftriaxone can still be a good choice for PPROM therapy since both cephalosporins have succeeded in preventing infections in women with PPROM.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3823/839\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International Arabic Journal of Antimicrobial Agents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3823/839","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:抗生素是众所周知的,并被推荐作为早产胎膜早破(PPROM)的主要治疗方法。但是,除了推荐的大环内酯类药物外,对抗生素的研究仍然缺乏。本研究旨在通过比较潜伏期的长短和婴儿结局,评价头孢噻肟和头孢曲松对PPROM妊娠的影响是否存在差异。材料和方法:通过2017年1月至12月期间印度尼西亚Soetomo泗水总医院的病历回顾性获取数据。纳入标准为妊娠PPROM史(0.05),其中a组的中位数为52,67小时,B组的中位数为34,17小时。发现A组更能延长潜伏期>48小时,比例为57.8%,而B组仅为42.9%。婴儿结局没有显著差异;婴儿出生体重和阿普加评分。结论:泗水苏莫医生总医院更适宜使用头孢噻肟。尽管如此,头孢曲松仍然是PPROM治疗的一个很好的选择,因为两种头孢菌素都成功地预防了PPROM妇女的感染。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cefotaxime vs Ceftriaxone for the Management of Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes
Introduction: Antibiotics are well known and recommended as the main therapy for preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM.) But the research on antibiotics other than the recommended macrolides regimens is still lacking. This research aims to evaluate whether there are effects differences of cefotaxime and ceftriaxone given on pregnancy with PPROM by comparing the duration of the latency period and the infants outcomes. Material and Methods: Data was taken retrospectively through medical records at Dr. Soetomo Surabaya General Hospital, Indonesia during the period of January-December 2017. The inclusion criteria were a history of PPROM in pregnancy <37 weeks, given cefotaxime or ceftriaxone therapy, and have labor data. The analysis was performed by the Mann-Whitney comparison test for the latency period and Fisher's exact test for infant outcomes. Results: There were 52 samples obtained. The antibiotics used were cefotaxime 3x1gr (A) and ceftriaxone 2x1gr (B). The results of the analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the types of antibiotics with the length of the latency period, with a value of p = 0,601 (p>0,05), where group A had a median of 52,67 hours and group B was 34,17 hours. Group A was found to be more able to extend the latency period for >48 hours with a percentage of 57,8%, whereas in group B only 42,9%. There are no significant differences in infant outcomes; infant birth weight and Apgar score among the two therapies used. Conclusion: Cefotaxime was more preferably to be used in the Dr. Soetomo Surabaya General Hospital. Nevertheless, ceftriaxone can still be a good choice for PPROM therapy since both cephalosporins have succeeded in preventing infections in women with PPROM.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Antibiogram of bacterial isolates from clinical specimens during 2018-2020 at Al-Aqsa hospital, Gaza, Palestine Impact Of COVID-19 Pandemic On The Pattern Of Azithromycin Prescribing; A Review Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern and Virulence Genes Detection in Citrobacter freundii Isolated from Patients of a Tertiary Care Hospital, Bangladesh Co-infection in patients with COVID-19 in Tripoli Northern Lebanon: germs involved and antibiotic sensitivity profile. Carbapenemase typing and resistance profile of Enterobacteriaceae with reduced sensitivity to carbapenems in a Middle Eastern tertiary care center
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1