OBJECTIVE:To observe the efficacy and safety of doxofylline combined with ceftazidime in the treatment of elder-ly patients with chronic emphysema. METHODS:Data of 78 elderly patients with ceftazidime was collected and divided into single drug group(31 cases)and combined medication group(47 cases)according to different treatment methods. All patients adopted flu-id infusion,oxygen inhalation and nutrition support. Based on it,single drug group received 0.05 g Doxofylline injection,once ev-ery 12 h. Combined medication group additionally received 1.0 g Ceftazidime for injection,once every 12 h. If the symptoms were out of control,20 mg prednisone was given,twice a day. The courses of 2 groups were 10 d. Total efficacy,pulmonary functions [maximum mid-expiratory flow(MMEF),1s forced expiratory volume percent predicted(FEV1%),peak expiratory flow(PEF)] before and after treatment,American Concise Health Survey Questionnaire(SF-36 scale)(QLS)and the incidence of adverse reac-tions in 2 groups were observed. RESULTS:The total effective rate in combined medication group was significantly higher than sin-gle drug group,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Before treatment,there was no significant difference in MMEF,FEV1%,PEF and QLS scores between 2 groups(P>0.05). After treatment,MMEF,FEV1%,PEF and QLS scores in 2 groups were significantly higher than before,and combined medication group MMEF,FEV1%、PEF were higher than single drug group,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05),but there was no significant difference QLS scores in 2 groups(P>0.05). And there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions in 2 groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Based on conventional treatment,doxofylline combined with ceftazidime shows better efficacy than doxofylline alone in the treat-ment of elderly patients with chronic emphysema,it can improve pulmonary functions,with better safety.

Objective To explore the therapeutic effect,advantages and shortcomings of pleural effusion controlled by interrupted drainage via central venous catheter.Methods The research group had 52 cases with pleural effusion controHed by interrupted drainage via central venous catheter,and the control group had 50 cases with pleural effusion controlled by conventional pleuracentesis.Pleural effusion disappearing time,average hospitalization time,pleuracentesis frequency,related therapy expenses and complications of two groups were observed and compared.Results The pleuracentesis frequency,pleural effusion disappearing time,average hospitalization time,related therapy expenses and per capita incidence of complications of the research group were(1.06±1.30)times,(4.31±2.20)days,(9.87±2.30)days,(264.77±37.20)yuan and 9.62%and in the control group were(4.20±2.60)times,(9.92±3.70)days,(15.08±5.80)days,(487.62±55.56)yuan and 38.00%.The differences between two groups were particularly remarkable.Conclusion The method of pleural effusion controlled by interruptod drainage via central venous catheter is safe,eonvenient,economical and microtraumatic,and it is worth using more widely.