文摘

背景:尽管相对大量的临床研究比较口服氟喹诺酮类原料药和一种抗生素类比较器,有有限的信息在不同的氟喹诺酮类原料药的相对有效性。目的:观察口服氟喹诺酮类原料药的疗效和耐受性轻度至中度的治疗社区获得性肺炎,慢性支气管炎急性加重和鼻窦炎。方法:系统回顾了MEDLINE寻找抗生素和适应症。包括研究符合以下标准:最初的研究;随机分配到治疗组;治疗的口服抗生素莫西沙星、左氧氟沙星、环丙沙星、氟哌酸;安慰剂或积极的比较器控制的药物;双盲单盲或开放治疗;男性和女性(18岁以上);诊断的三个指标;和治疗时间至少三天。结果评价包括疗效和安全性。 Comparative and single arm meta-analyses were conducted. Statistical differences in antibiotic success rates were evaluated. Pooled point estimates and 95% CIs for the comparative statistics (z-scores, P-values) and the single-arm analysis were examined to evaluate equivalence.RESULTS: The results of the comparative and single meta-analyses revealed no major differences between the new fluoroquinolones. This is not surprising because the clinical studies were designed to show equivalence versus their comparators. Few comparative evaluations were conducted due to a paucity of studies. In relation to other competitors, small differences were seen.CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that, in general, fluoroquinolones had similar efficacy, overall safety and dropout rates.