학술논문

A dose-finding study of nasal Fosfomycin (FOM) for the treatment of sinusitis / 鼻科用Fosfomycin (FOM) の副鼻腔炎に対するネブライザー療法による用量設定比較試験
Document Type
Journal Article
Author
Akiko NISHIYAMAAkira YOKOTAAkiyasu UCHIZONOAtsushi KOMATSUZAKIChiyonori INOFumikazu MIZUKOSHIGoro MOGIHaruhiko NAKAMURAHideyo ASAIHideyuki KAWAUCHIHirosato MIYAKEHiroshi MATSUURAHiroshi TAKENAKAHiroyuki YOSHIMURAHitoshi SAITOJun-ichi BUNDOUJunko TAKADAKatsuhiro HIRAKAWAKatsuya AKIOKAKazuhiro OTAKazuo SATOKeiichi DATEKeiji MORIYAKenji SAKAKURAKentaro ASHIDAKohji YUTAKohnosuke WAKUTAKouichi USHIROKouji AJISAKAKoukichi HAMAGUCHIMakoto HYUGAMariko TANAKAMasako YOKOTAMasaru OYAMAMichihiko OGATAMitsuie MASITTIAMitsuyoshi NAKAJIMANaoya MIYAMOTONatsuki MORISHIMANizo TAKANAMINorikazu SUGIURANoritsugu KANEDAReiki YAGATAReiko KASHIWAGISatoshi SAIDAShigeharu FUJIEDAShubun TAKEBAYASHIShunkichi BABASouiku WATANABETadao NISHIMURATakao SONODATakashi MATSUNAGATakehiro KOBAYASHITakeshi KUBOTakuo NOBORITamotsu MORIMITSUTatsuya OKUZONOTatsuyuki FUKUSHIMATomio TERAZONOTomomi ITAYAToru MATSUNAGAToru SEKITANIToshihiko MAEDAToshikazu TOKUDAToshiko KAMIHATAToshio YAMASHITATsuneo YOSHIKAWATsutomu MATSUZAKIWataru OSHIMAYasuhiro MIYAZAKIYasuo HARADAYasuo IWABUCHIYasuo SAKAKURAYasushi MURAKAMIYnirhi OGATAYoshiaki KAWASAKIYoshiaki NAKAIYoshihiro OHASHIYoshiko OKUZONOYuichi MAJIMAYukio ETOHYuko KOBAYASHI三宅 浩郷中井 義明中島 光好中村 晴彦久保 武井野 千代徳伊達 敬一佐藤 一雄内薗 明裕分藤 準一前田 稔彦原田 康夫吉川 恒男吉村 弘之和久田 幸之助園田 隆郎坂倉 健二坂倉 康夫増田 光家大山 勝大島 渉大橋 淑宏太田 和博奥園 美子奥園 達也守谷 啓司宮崎 康博宮本 直哉寺薗 富朗小松崎 篤小林 優子小林 武弘山下 敏夫岩淵 康雄川内 秀之川嵜 良明平川 勝洋徳田 寿一斎田 哲斎藤 等日向 誠昇 卓夫杉浦 欣一村上 泰松崎 勉松永 亨松永 喬松浦 宏司板谷 知巳柏木 令子森島 夏樹森満 保横田 明横田 雅子水越 文和浅井 英世浜口 幸吉渡辺 荘郁湯田 厚司牛呂 公一田中 真理子矢形 礼貴神畠 俊子福島 龍之秋岡 勝哉竹中 洋竹林 脩文緒方 洋一緒方 道彦芦田 健太郎茂木 五郎藤枝 重治衛藤 幸男西山 彰子西村 忠郎金田 規嗣間島 雄一関谷 透馬場 駿吉高波 二三高田 順子鰺坂 孝二
Source
耳鼻と臨床 / jibi to rinsho. 1995, 41(2):218
Subject
Fosfomycin
ネブライザー療法
副鼻腔炎
Language
Japanese
ISSN
0447-7227
2185-1034
Abstract
We performed a dose-finding study on nasal FOM, as an antibiotics for nebulization, in the treatment of an acute exacerbation of chronic sinusitis and compared this treatment with the oral administration of FOM as a control group and the follwing results were obtained; The rate of clinical efficacy was 85%in the 3%group, 76%in the 5%group and 57%in the transoral group-There was a significant difference between the 3%and the transoral group, There were no siginificant differences between the 5%group and the transoral group, or between the 3%and the 5%groups. Neither the biological eradication rate nor the radiological improvement rate showed any significant difference among the groups The incidence of adverse reactions was 2%, 5%, and 31%in each group, respectively. The differences between the nebulization group and the transoral group were significant. Abnormal laboratory findings were observed in 5 cases, but only in the transoral group. The rates of usefulness were 83%, 73% and 44% in each group. There were significant differences between the nebulization group and the transoral group. The above results indicated that the nebulization of FOM for sinusitis was useful in comparison to oral administration. In addition, no significant difference was observed between the 3%and the 5% nebulization groups with any of the results presented above. We thusconcluded that 3%was the optimal concentration of nasal FOM for sinusitis.