中华皮肤科杂志 ›› 2016, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (9): 658-659.

• 研究报道 • 上一篇    下一篇

夫西地酸对寻常痤疮患者皮损表皮葡萄球菌和痤疮丙酸杆菌的体外抗菌作用研究

高诗燕1,路永红1,陈涛1,王珊珊1,何丽莎2,单雨婷3,周培媚1,瓦庆彪4,吴波4,李林1,陈前明4,保勇4,尹亚菲5,陆玲5   

  1. 1. 成都市第二人民医院皮肤科
    2. 遵义医学院 成都市第二人民医院
    3. 成都市第二人民医院皮肤科（遵义医学院附属成都医院）
    4. 成都市第二人民医院
    5. 成都市第二人民医院检验科
  • 收稿日期:2016-06-07 修回日期:2016-02-23 出版日期:2016-09-15 发布日期:2016-08-30
  • 通讯作者: 路永红 E-mail:1255395583@qq.com
  • 基金资助:

    成都市卫生局联合攻关项目

In vitro antibacterial activity of fusidic acid cream against Staphylococcus epipermidis and Propionibacterium acnes isolates from acne vulgaris lesions

  • Received:2016-06-07 Revised:2016-02-23 Online:2016-09-15 Published:2016-08-30

PDF

43

赞

摘要：

目的 探讨2%夫西地酸乳膏对寻常痤疮皮损中表皮葡萄球菌和痤疮丙酸杆菌的体外抗菌活性。方法 用琼脂扩散法作药敏试验，比较夫西地酸和莫匹罗星对表皮葡萄球菌和痤疮丙酸杆菌的体外抗菌活性。结果 夫西地酸和莫匹罗星对表皮葡萄球菌的抑菌环直径分别为（31.76 ± 6.05）和（31.98 ± 17.20） mm，差异无统计学意义（t = 0.132，P > 0.05），对痤疮丙酸杆菌的抑菌环直径分别为（18.15 ± 3.24）和（3.00 ± 0.00） mm，差异有统计学意义（t = 24.27，P < 0.05）。结论 夫西地酸体外对寻常痤疮患者皮损中的优势菌株表皮葡萄球菌和痤疮丙酸杆菌有较强的抗菌作用。

Abstract:

Gao Shiyan, Lu Yonghong, Chen Tao, Wang Shanshan, He Lisha, Shan Yuting, Zhou Peimei, Wa Qingbiao, Wu Bo, Li Lin, Chen Qianming, Bao Yong, Yin Yafei, Lu Ling Department of Dermatology, Chengdu Hospital Affiliated to Zunyi Medical College and Chengdu Second People′s Hospital, Chengdu 610017, China （Gao SY, Lu YH, Chen T, Wang SS, He LS, Shan YT, Zhou PM, Wa QB, Wu B, Li L, Chen QM）; Clinical Laboratory, Chengdu Hospital Affiliated to Zunyi Medical College and Chengdu Second People′s Hospital, Chengdu 610017, China （Bao Y, Yin YF, Lu L） Corresponding author: Lu Yonghong, Email: 1255395583@qq.com 【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the in vitro antibacterial activity of fusidic acid cream against Staphylococcus epipermidis and Propionibacterium acnes isolates from acne vulgaris lesions. Methods The agar diffusion method was used to evaluate the antibacterial activity of fusidic acid cream and mupirocin ointment against S. epipermidis and P. acnes isolates from acne vulgaris lesions in vitro. Inhibition zone diameters were measured and compared between the two topical drugs. Results A significant difference was observed between the fusidic acid cream and mupirocm ointment in the inhibition zone diameters for P. acnes （18.15 ± 3.24 vs. 3.00 ± 0.00 mm, t = 24.27，P < 0.05）, but not in those for S. epidermidis （31.76 ± 6.05 vs. 31.98 ± 17.20 mm, t = 0.132, P > 0.05）. Conclusion Fusidic acid cream displays strong in vitro antibacterial activity against S. epidermidis and P. acnes isolates from acne vulgaris lesions.