四磨汤口服液联合复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊治疗腹泻型肠易激综合征临床探究.doc

《四磨汤口服液联合复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊治疗腹泻型肠易激综合征临床探究.doc》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在工程资料-天天文库。

1、四磨汤口服液联合复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊治疗腹泻型肠易激综合征临床探究摘要：目的观察四磨汤口服液联合复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊治疗腹泻型肠易激综合征(IBS-D)肝郁脾虚证临床疗效，并探讨其作用机制。方法将60例IBS-D患者随机分为2组，治疗组30例给予四磨汤口服液、复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊口服，对照组30例给予马来酸曲美布汀片、枯草杆菌二联活菌肠溶胶囊口服，疗程4周。比较2组治疗前后临床症状及5-释色胺(5-HT)、P物质(SP)水平变化,记录复发率、不良反应。结果治疗1、2、4周总有效率2组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)；治疗4周后治疗组症状总积分及腹胀、排便急迫感

2、积分明显低于对照组(P<0.05)；治疗后2组患者血清5-HT、SP水平均较治疗前明显下降(P<0.05)；治疗组、对照组停药4周后复发率分别为10.7%(3/28)、32.1%(9/28),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组均未见明显不良反应。结论四磨汤口服液联合复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊治疗IBS-D肝郁脾虚证疗效显著，尤善于缓解腹胀、排便急迫感症状,其作用机制可能与降低血清5-HT、SP水平有关。关键词：腹泻型肠易激综合征；肝郁脾虚证；四磨汤口服液；复方谷氨酰胺肠溶胶囊DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1005-5304.2013.08.005中图分类号：R

3、259.744文献标识码：A文章编号：1005-5304(2013)08-001l-04ClinicalResearchofSimotangOralLiquidandCompoundGlutamineEntericCapsulesforTreatingDiarrhea-predominantIrritableBowelSyndromeWUYong-hong,ZHENGGuo~rong(DepartmentofDigestiveSystem,WuhanGeneralHospitalofGuangzhouMilitaryRegionofPLA,Wuhan430070,C

4、hina)Abstract:ObjectiveToobservetheclinicalefficacyofSimotangoralliquidcombinedwithcompoundglutamineentericcapsulesinthetreatmentofdiarrhea-predominantirritablebowelsyndrome(IBS^D)belongingtoliverdepressionandspleendeficiencypattern,andtoexploreitspossiblemechanism・MethodsSixtypatients

5、wererandomlydividedintotwogroups・Thetreatmentgoup(30cases)tookSimotangoralliquidandcompoundglutamineentericcapsules,thecontrolgrouptookCerekinonandMedilac-S・Thetreatmentcoursewas4weeks・Clinicalsymptoms,5-hydroxytryptamine(5~HT)andsubstanceP(SP)ofbothgroupswereevaluatedrespectivelybefor

6、eandaftertreatment.Recurrencerateandadversereactionswererecorded・ResuItsThetotaleffectiverateaftertreating1,2,4weeksbetweenthetwogroupshadnosignificantdifference(P>0.05).Fourweekslater,inthetreatmentgroup,totalscoreofthesymptoms,abdominaldistensionanddefecationurgencywereapparentlylowe

7、rthanthatofcontrolgroup(P<0.05).Thelevelsof5-HTandSPofthetwogroupssignificantlydecreasedaftertreatment(P<0.05).Therecurrencerateat4weeksafterdrugwithdrawaloftreatmentgroupandcontrolgroupwas10.7%(3/28)and32.1%(9/28)respectively.Thedifferencebetweenthetwogroupswasn"tsignificant(P>0.05)