Effect of Azithromycin Sequential Therapy Combined with Methylprednisolone on Pulmonary Function Indices and Immune Indices in Children with Severe Mycoplasma Pneumonia
-
摘要:
目的 探究阿奇霉素序贯疗法联合甲基强的松龙治疗对支原体重症肺炎患儿肺功能指标及免疫指标的影响。 方法 回顾性分析某院2023年1月至2025年6月收治的150例重症肺炎支原体肺炎患儿的临床资料,按治疗方式不同分为研究组(n = 75,采取阿奇霉素序贯疗法联合甲基强的松龙治疗)和对照组(n = 75,采取阿奇霉素序贯治疗),比较两组临床疗效、炎性因子、肺功能指标、免疫指标和不良反应。 结果 治疗后研究组临床肺部感染评分、白细胞介素-6、降钙素原、可溶性程序性死亡受体-配体1和超敏C反应蛋白水平、胸部影像学评分与气道黏膜炎症评分均低于对照组(P < 0.05),最大通气量、第一秒用力呼气量、最大呼气流速、用力肺活量、75%肺活量时呼气流量和50%肺活量时呼吸流量、免疫球蛋白A、免疫球蛋白G、补体C3、补体C4水平均高于对照组,且发热、咳嗽、咳痰、湿啰音持续时间均短于对照组(P < 0.05);治疗后,两组不良反应总发生率对比差异无统计学意义,研究组未见显著提高(P > 0.05)。 结论 阿奇霉素序贯疗法联合甲基强的松龙治疗能够改善重症肺炎支原体肺炎患儿炎性因子水平和肺功能指标,调节免疫,增强疗效,且具有一定安全性。 -
关键词:
- 阿奇霉素 /
- 甲基强的松龙 /
- 儿童重症肺炎支原体肺炎 /
- 安全性
Abstract:Objective To investigate the effects of azithromycin sequential therapy combined with methylprednisolone on pulmonary function indices and immune indices in children with severe Mycoplasma pneumonia. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 150 children with severe Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia admitted to a certain hospital from January 2023 to June 2025. According to different treatment modalities, they were divided into a study group(n = 75, treated with azithromycin sequential therapy combined with methylprednisolone) and a control group(n = 75, treated with azithromycin sequential therapy) .The clinical efficacy, inflammatory factors, pulmonary function indices, immune indices, and adverse reactions of the two groups were compared. Results After treatment, the clinical pulmonary infection score, levels of interleukin-6, procalcitonin, soluble programmed death receptor ligand 1, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, as well as chest imaging score and airway mucosal inflammation score in the study group were all lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The maximum voluntary ventilation, forced expiratory volume in the first second, peak expiratory flow, forced vital capacity, forced expiratory flow at 75% of vital capacity, forced expiratory flow at 50% of vital capacity, and levels of immunoglobulin A, immunoglobulin G, complement C3, and complement C4 were all higher than those in the control group, and the duration of fever, cough, sputum production, and moist rales were shorter than those of the control group (P < 0.05); After treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in the total incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups, and there was no significant improvement in the study group (P > 0.05). Conclusion Azithromycin sequential therapy combined with methylprednisolone can improve the levels of inflammatory factors and pulmonary function indices, regulate immunity, and enhance therapeutic efficacy in children with severe Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia, with a certain level of safety. -
表 1 一般资料对比[($ \bar x \pm s $)/n(%)]
Table 1. Comparison of general data[($ \bar x \pm s $)/n(%)]
组别 性别 年龄(岁) 入院前热程(d) 出现症状至入院时间(d) 男 女 研究组(n=75) 36(48.00) 39(52.00) 5.12 ± 1.07 2.13 ± 0.22 4.09 ± 0.31 对照组(n=75) 33(44.00) 42(56.00) 5.18 ± 1.01 2.09 ± 0.20 4.03 ± 0.40 χ2/t 0.242 0.353 1.165 1.027 P 0.623 0.725 0.246 0.306 表 2 两组临床疗效比较($ \bar x \pm s $)
Table 2. Comparison of clinical efficacy between the two groups ($ \bar x \pm s $)
组别 GPIS(分) 发热持续时间(d) 咳嗽持续时间(d) 咳痰持续时间(d) 湿啰音持续时间(d) 治疗前 治疗后 对照组(n=75) 7.40 ± 0.82 2.56 ± 0.22∆ 3.32 ± 0.48 6.12 ± 1.12 5.02 ± 1.17 6.56 ± 1.28 研究组(n=75) 7.45 ± 0.77 2.40 ± 0.36∆# 3.01 ± 0.25# 5.73 ± 1.08# 4.33 ± 1.26# 6.06 ± 1.32# t 0.385 3.284 3.200 2.171 3.475 2.355 P 0.701 0.001* 0.002* 0.032* 0.001* 0.020* *P < 0.05;与治疗前相比,∆P < 0.05;与对照组比较,#P < 0.05。 表 3 两组炎性因子比较[($ \bar x \pm s $)/M(P25,P75)]
Table 3. Comparison of inflammatory factors between the two groups[($ \bar x \pm s $)/M(P25,P75)]
组别 IL-6(ng/L) PCT(ng/L) sPD-L1(μg/L) hs-CRP(mg/L) 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 对照组(n=75) 58.62 ± 5.55 35.35 ± 2.51∆ 5.74 ± 1.38 2.48 ± 0.40∆ 264.43 ± 20.41 206.22 ± 20.22∆ 58.91(40.40,100.44) 8.62(5.20,12.48)∆ 研究组(n=75) 58.69 ± 5.61 33.61 ± 2.33∆# 5.66 ± 1.28 2.08 ± 0.21∆# 263.37 ± 20.49 198.39 ± 20.32∆# 58.85(40.35,101.43 10.31(8.26,22.42)∆# t 0.077 4.400 0.368 7.668 0.317 2.366 −1.272 −2.591 P 0.939 <0.001* 0.713 <0.001* 0.751 0.019* 0.705 0.022* *P < 0.05;与治疗前相比,∆P < 0.05;与对照组比较,#P < 0.05。 表 4 两组肺功能指标比较($ \bar x \pm s $)
Table 4. Comparison of pulmonary function indicators between the two groups ($ \bar x \pm s $)
组别 MVV(mL/s) PEF(L/min) FVC(L) FEF75(L/s) FEF50(L/s) FEV1(L) 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 对照组(n=75) 91.58 ± 9.42 126.36 ± 10.42∆ 6.74 ± 1.36 8.09 ± 1.80∆ 2.78 ± 0.26 3.70 ± 0.52∆ 1.32 ± 0.15 1.45 ± 0.34∆ 1.90 ± 0.42 2.24 ± 0.29∆ 1.69 ± 0.18 2.10 ± 0.23∆ 研究组(n=75) 91.66 ± 9.71 135.88 ± 10.38∆# 6.82 ± 1.20 8.96 ± 1.77∆# 2.70 ± 0.24 3.91 ± 0.66∆# 1.35 ± 0.16 1.68 ± 0.55∆# 1.95 ± 0.34 2.36 ± 0.28∆# 1.73 ± 0.29 2.26 ± 0.27∆# t 0.051 5.606 0.382 2.985 1.958 2.165 1.185 3.081 0.801 2.578 1.015 2.907 P 0.959 <0.001* 0.703 0.003* 0.052 0.032* 0.238 0.003* 0.424 0.011* 0.312 <0.001* *P < 0.05;与治疗前相比,∆P < 0.05;与对照组比较,#P < 0.05。 表 5 两组免疫指标比较($ \bar x \pm s $,g/L)
Table 5. Comparison of immune indices between the two groups($ \bar x \pm s $,g/L)
组别 IgA IgG C3 C4 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 对照组(n=75) 0.68 ± 0.09 1.65 ± 0.28∆ 6.79 ± 1.34 7.77 ± 1.90∆ 0.59 ± 0.15 1.10 ± 0.11∆ 0.18 ± 0.08 0.40 ± 0.10∆ 研究组(n=75) 0.66 ± 0.14 1.75 ± 0.24∆# 6.83 ± 1.21 10.16 ± 1.17∆# 0.62 ± 0.12 1.20 ± 0.33∆# 0.20 ± 0.05 0.45 ± 0.12∆# t 1.041 2.348 0.192 9.276 1.353 2.490 1.836 2.772 P 0.300 0.020* 0.848 <0.001* 0.178 0.014* 0.068 0.007* *P < 0.05;与治疗前相比,∆P < 0.05;与对照组比较,#P < 0.05。 表 6 两组不良反应比较[n(%)]
Table 6. Comparison of adverse reactions between the two groups [n(%)]
组别 恶心 呕吐 腹泻 腹痛 皮疹 总发生率 对照组(n=75) 1(1.33) 1(1.33) 2(2.67) 1(1.33) 0(0.00) 5(6.67) 研究组(n=75) 2(2.67) 1(1.33) 2(2.67) 1(1.33) 1(1.33) 7(9.33) χ2 0.340 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.007 0.362 P 0.560 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.316 0.547 表 7 两组胸部影像学评分与气道黏膜炎症评分比较($ \bar x \pm s $,分)
Table 7. Comparison of chest imaging scores and airway mucosal inflammation scores between the two groups($ \bar x \pm s $,points)
组别 气道黏膜炎症评分 胸部影像学评分 治疗前 治疗后 治疗前 治疗后 对照组
(n=75)18.26 ± 1.33 8.39 ± 1.20∆ 12.05 ± 1.15 8.02 ± 1.31∆ 研究组
(n=75)18.33 ± 1.28 5.54 ± 1.05∆# 12.11 ± 1.34 6.50 ± 1.10∆# t 0.328 15.479 0.294 7.695 P 0.743 <0.001* 0.769 <0.001* *P < 0.05;与治疗前相比,∆P < 0.05;与对照组比较,#P < 0.05。 -
[1] 闫敏, 王沂霞, 田涛, 等. 基于胸部CT征象与肺炎支原体抗体水平构建小儿肺炎支原体肺炎的诊断模型[J]. 中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2025, 31(2): 246-250. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5741.2025.02.017 [2] 柴彦艳, 邓芳, 许愿愿, 等. 重症肺炎支原体肺炎患儿临床特征与实验室指标及预后的关系[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2025, 35(20): 3124-3127. doi: 10.11816/cn.ni.2025-250589 [3] 李晋菊, 朱江川, 宋瑞. 重症肺炎患儿支气管肺泡灌洗液中肺炎支原体的检测及其对阿奇霉素治疗反应的回顾性分析[J]. 临床和实验医学杂志, 2025, 24(4): 409-413. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-4695.2025.04.018 [4] 杨峥蓉, 窦海伟, 蔡宇昂, 等. 肺炎支原体288株对阿奇霉素和红霉素的最小抑菌浓度及其耐药基因变异研究[J]. 中华实用儿科临床杂志, 2025, 40(10): 771-774. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn101070-20250514-00350 [5] Meyer Sauteur P M, Seiler M, Tilen R, et al. A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of placebo versus macrolide antibiotics for Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection in children with community-acquired pneumonia: Trial protocol for the MYTHIC Study[J]. Trials, 2024, 25(1): 655. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08438-6 [6] Meduri G U, Shih M C, Bridges L, et al. Low-dose methylprednisolone treatment in critically ill patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2022, 48(8): 1009-1023. doi: 10.1007/s00134-022-06684-3 [7] 中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会. 儿童肺炎支原体肺炎诊疗指南(2023年版)[J]. 国际流行病学传染病学杂志, 2023, 50(2): 79-85. [8] Gaudet A, Martin-Loeches I, Povoa P, et al. Accuracy of the clinical pulmonary infection score to differentiate ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis from ventilator-associated pneumonia[J]. Ann Intensive Care, 2020, 10(1): 101. doi: 10.1186/s13613-020-00721-4 [9] 刘松, 谢红, 余成新, 等. 新型冠状病毒肺炎患者的临床特点及肺部CT变化模式[J]. 放射学实践, 2020, 35(4): 421-427. doi: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2020.04.004 [10] Thomas R J, Eg K P, Masters I B, et al. Towards developing a valid scoring tool for bronchitis during flexible bronchoscopy[J]. Pediatr Pulmonol, 2018, 53(11): 1510-1516. doi: 10.1002/ppul.24163 [11] Vidal A G J, Alibayov B, Frame I J, et al. Induction of the macrolide-resistance efflux pump Mega inhibits intoxication of Staphylococcus aureus strains by Streptococcus pneumoniae[J]. Microbiol Res, 2022, 263: 127134. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2022.127134 [12] 高珊, 马亚波, 董艳菊. 低剂量甲基强的松龙对重症肺炎患儿短期预后的影响研究[J]. 中国急救复苏与灾害医学杂志, 2022, 17(11): 1470-1473. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-6966.2022.11.018 [13] 吴维仪, 董琴琴, 梁明欣, 等. 维生素D联合阿奇霉素治疗小儿肺炎支原体肺炎的疗效及对血清炎症因子和T淋巴细胞亚群的影响[J]. 转化医学杂志, 2025, 14(4): 166-170. doi: 10.3639/j.issn.2095-3097.2025.04.032 [14] Greco Kinney A, Kovacic Scherrer N, Sarkar S, et al. β-Lactams plus doxycycline versus azithromycin for treatment of severe community-acquired pneumonia in critically ill patients[J]. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2023, 78(12): 2816-2823. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkad301 [15] 殷平辉, 张文静, 吴佳妮, 等. 孟鲁司特钠联合阿奇霉素对难治性肺炎支原体肺炎患儿肺功能、肺部炎症及血TLR2信号通路相关因子、microRNA-1323表达的影响[J]. 西北药学杂志, 2025, 40(6): 22-29. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-2407.2025.06.004 [16] 唐超智, 耿晓柯, 张玉玲, 等. 阿奇霉素的免疫治疗机制[J]. 中国免疫学杂志, 2021, 37(14): 1768-1771. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-484X.2021.14.021 [17] 张哲梅, 魏莲花, 王丹妮, 等. CRP、SAA、IL-6、PCT及WBC在儿童上呼吸道感染及消化道感染性疾病中的诊断价值[J]. 标记免疫分析与临床, 2023, 30(6): 953-959. doi: 10.11748/bjmy.issn.1006-1703.2023.06.011 [18] 贺新伟, 骆琼珍, 赵丽丽, 等. 成人社区获得性肺炎患者血清可溶性程序性死亡受体配体-1的表达及意义[J]. 中华内科杂志, 2021, 60(3): 243-246. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112138-20200306-00200 [19] Huang Y, Chen Y, Liu M, et al. Comparative analysis of Chlamydia pneumoniae pneumonia (CPP) and Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in children and risk factors of severe CPP[J]. BMC Infect Dis, 2025, 25(1): 993. doi: 10.1186/s12879-025-11405-4 [20] 高世悦, 朱保卫. 红霉素和阿奇霉素序贯治疗小儿肺炎支原体肺炎的临床疗效和不良反应观察[J]. 贵州医药, 2022, 46(9): 1393-1394. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-744X.2022.09.027 [21] 闫若原, 梁金玲, 梁爽. 甲泼尼龙联合盐酸氨溴索治疗儿童社区获得性肺炎的疗效[J]. 中国药物应用与监测, 2025, 22(6): 1116-1119. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-8157.2025.06.034 [22] 尹力, 王雪, 高密密, 等. 甲泼尼龙琥珀酸钠辅助治疗儿童重症肺炎支原体肺炎的临床疗效分析及对患儿血LDH、CRP和T淋巴细胞亚群的影响[J]. 中国生育健康杂志, 2025, 36(4): 334-338+359. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-878X.2025.04.007 [23] 杜博英, 郭在强, 刘杰, 等. 阿奇霉素治疗肺炎支原体肺炎发生不良反应列线图预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 临床与病理杂志, 2025, 45(4): 443-451. doi: 10.11817/j.issn.2095-6959.2025.240919 [24] 黄斌, 时澄. 甲泼尼龙治疗儿童呼吸系统疾病所致不良反应85例分析[J]. 中国药物应用与监测, 2025, 22(1): 166-169. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-8157.2025.01.038 [25] 李红桥, 夏雯, 李兰, 等. 多西环素与阿奇霉素治疗儿童支原体肺炎有效性、安全性及经济学比较[J]. 中国药业, 2025, 34(4): 115-118. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-4931.2025.04.028 -
下载: