The clinical effectiveness and safety of Cefoperazone (CPZ, T-1551) and Cefazolin (CEZ) were compared in this randomized, double-blind multi-clinical study of 239 patients with respiratory tract infections. Patients were assigned to treatment with either CPZ or CEZ by drip infusion for 7 to 14 days at a daily dose of 4 g.
The results obtained were as follows:
1. One hundred and eighty-eight patients were selected for evaluation by committee members. 90 of these patients were treated with CPZ and 98 were treated with CEZ. Each number of patients administered either CPZ or CEZ was 40 and 36 in bacterial pneumonia, 9 and 9 in mycoplasmal pneumonia and primary atypical pneumonia (PAP), and 31 and 27 in chronic respiratory tract infections, respectively.
2. On the other hand, one hundred and ninty-five patients were selected, excepting that was remarkably against the rule, the number of cases adopted as able as possible by doctors in charge. 95 of these patients were treated with CPZ and 100 were treated with ABPC.
3. The clinical efficacy rate (excellent and good results) in all cases adopted by committee members was 85.5% in CPZ group and 56.2% in CEZ group, respectively. The effectiveness in CPZ group was significantly superior to that of CEZ group.
4. The clinical efficacy of CPZ was significantly superior to that of CEZ in all cases adopted by doctors in charge.
5. CPZ showed an excellent effect for improvement of symptoms and findings of chest roentgenogram, property of sputum dyspnea and rales in bacterial pneumonia, and body temperature, property of sputum, WBC and CRP in chronic respiratory tract infections. The results obtained in CPZ group was significantly superior to that in CEZ group.
6. No significant difference was observed in the occurrence of side effect between both groups.
7. The utility of CPZ was significantly superior to that of CEZ. The results indicated thus that CPZ is more useful for therapy of respiratory tract infection than CEZ.
View full abstract