瑞巴派特治疗胃溃疡的效果观察

对使用瑞巴派特治疗胃溃疡的效果进行分析探讨。将就诊的86例胃溃疡患者随机分成两组:观察组44例和对照组42例,对照组首先口服阿莫西林、奥美拉唑及甲硝唑治疗2w,然后再口服奥美拉唑治疗6w;观察组在对照组的基础上,加服瑞巴派特治疗2w,然后再口服瑞巴派特和奥美拉唑治疗6w。分析、比较两组的治疗效果经过治疗,观察组总有效率为90.9%,对照组为73.8%,两者比较,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。使用瑞巴派特治疗胃溃疡具有良好的效果,并且具有安全、可靠的特点,值得进行推广使用。     

瑞巴派特保留灌肠治疗溃疡性结肠炎疗效分析

目的：观察瑞巴派特保留灌肠治疗溃疡性结肠炎的临床疗效。方法：将78例活动期溃疡性结肠炎患者随机分为两组．治疗组在常规药物治疗基础上加用瑞巴派特保留灌肠治疗，对照组用常规药物治疗，4周后评价药物疗效和安全性。结果：治疗4周末治疗组缓解率为57．5％，总有效率为90．0％，而对照组分别为31．6％、65．8％，治疗组明显优于对照组，差异有显著性（P〈0．025，P〈0．01）。结论：瑞巴派特保留灌肠治疗溃疡性结肠炎有较好的疗效，它可保护肠黏膜，抑制炎症，促进溃疡愈合，且并发症少，值得临床广泛应用。[著者文摘]     

莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎的疗效观察

目的研究观察莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特与单用莫沙比利治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎的治疗效果比较。方法对我院2011年6月~2013年12月期间收治的慢性萎缩性胃炎病例进行研究,包括门诊和住院经病理确诊的245例。将这些病例按随机数表的方法随机分为两组,观察组给予莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特进行治疗,对照组给予莫沙比利治疗。对比观察观察组和对照组患者的治疗有效率和幽门螺杆菌的根除率。结果观察组使用莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎的临床有效率和幽门螺杆菌的根除率明显高于对照组,其差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎相比于单纯使用莫沙比利具有更加明显的临床效果,可有效减少幽门螺杆菌的感染率而降低复发风险。     

雷贝拉唑联合瑞巴派特治疗活动性胃溃疡80例

目的 研究雷贝拉唑联合瑞巴派特治疗活动性胃溃疡80例的临床疗效.方法 选取2011年12月到2012年12月在郑州二砂医院消化科就诊治疗的良性活动性胃溃疡患者,随机分为研究组（40例）和对照组（40例）.研究组给予Hp三联方案之一（雷贝拉唑＋阿莫西林＋克拉霉素）联合瑞巴派特;对照组给予Hp根除三联方案（奥美拉唑＋阿莫西林＋克拉霉素）,两组治疗时间均为8周,观察两组临床疗效、炎症反应改善情况和不良反应.结果 研究组总有效率（97.5％）与对照组（95.0％）比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;两组炎症反应均有明显改善,与治疗前比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;研究组炎症的改善情况明显优于对照组,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,两组不良反应比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）.结论 雷贝拉唑联合瑞巴派特治疗活动性胃溃疡具有良好的临床疗效,能明显改善临床症状,促进炎症的消退,不良反应少,值得在临床上推广应用.     

雷贝拉唑联合瑞巴派特治疗活动性胃溃疡的临床研究

目的研究雷贝拉唑联合瑞巴派特治疗活动期胃溃疡的临床疗效。方法选取活动性胃溃疡患者98例,随机分为观察组和对照组各49例。对照组给予胃三联(雷贝拉唑+阿莫西林+甲硝唑)治疗,观察组在对照组基础上加用瑞巴派特。比较两组患者治疗1、2、4、6、8w症状改善情况、治疗8w后胃镜检查结果。结果观察组治疗后第2、4、6、8w症状改善情况明显优于对照组(P0.05);观察组疗效明显优于对照组(P0.05)。结论雷贝拉唑联合瑞巴派特治疗活动性胃溃疡临床效果显著,值得临床推广应用。     

胃镜电凝止血联合瑞巴派特治疗胃溃疡出血的疗效观察

目的观察胃镜电凝止血联合瑞巴派特治疗胃溃疡出血的临床疗效。方法选取2017年12月～2019年3月我科收治的胃溃疡出血患者128例,随机分为研究组和对照组各64例。两组患者均接受胃镜电凝止血治疗,在此基础上,研究组给予瑞巴派特治疗,对照组给予思密达创面喷洒治疗,两组均治疗4周。比较两组临床疗效、炎症反应指标变化及患者预后质差异。结果研究组治疗总有效率92.19%,明显高于对照组的75.00%(P<0.05);研究组炎症反应指标IL-6、IL-17、IL-23水平均明显高于对照组(P<0.05);研究组患者止血时间、输血量、住院时间等均明显短于对照组(P<0.05)。结论胃镜电凝止血联合瑞巴派特治疗可明显改善胃溃疡出血患者临床症状及机体高炎症状态,且对改善患者预后效果显著。     

莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎124例临床研究

目的:研究莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎的临床效果,为临床该类疾病的治疗提供依据.方法:对2009年4月至2011年10月我院入院治疗的248例慢性萎缩性胃炎患者进行了研究,随机分为两组,对照组单独给药莫沙比利,观察组采用莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特进行治疗,分析比较两组患者的临床有效率以及幽门螺旋杆菌根除率.结果:治疗组患者临床总有效率为94.4％,高于对照组71.0％,两组比较差异明显,有统计学意义(P＜0.05);治疗组患者幽门螺旋杆菌清除率可达80.6％,高于对照组41.9％,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论:莫沙比利联合瑞巴派特治疗慢性萎缩性胃炎临床效果显著,好于单一莫沙比利治疗,并且清除幽门螺旋杆菌更彻底,降低了复发的可能性,值得临床推广应用.     

瑞巴派特联合奥美拉唑、铝碳酸镁治疗胃溃疡伴胃出血的临床疗效及安全性观察

目的观察瑞巴派特联合奥美拉唑、铝碳酸镁治疗胃溃疡伴胃出血的临床疗效及安全性。方法选择2012年5月~2016年3月我院收治的胃溃疡伴胃出血患者120例。随机分为对照组和观察组各60例。对照组口服奥美拉唑+铝碳酸镁进行治疗,观察组则应用美拉唑+铝碳酸镁+瑞巴派特进行治疗。观察两组治疗效果。结果治疗后,对照组腹痛、嗳气、腹胀、便血/呕血等症状开始好转时间分别为5.33±1.26d、4.67±0.95d、6.86±1.47d、3.48±0.79d,均分别高于观察组的4.11±1.02d、3.32±0.71d、5.29±1.15d、2.77±0.51d,对照组治疗总有效率为81.67%,低于观察组的96.67%,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);对照组治疗期间不良反应发生率为8.33%,观察组为10.00%,两组不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论在胃溃疡伴胃出血患者中应用瑞巴派特联合奥美拉唑、铝碳酸镁进行治疗疗效显著,可促进溃疡面愈合,加速患者临床症状缓解,且不会增加药物不良反应,安全性高。     

瑞巴派特对胃粘膜组织PGE2含量的影响

目的观察瑞巴派特对非甾体抗炎药相关性胃炎胃粘膜PGE2含量的影响。方法将患者随机分为试验组和对照组,试验组口服瑞巴派特,对照组口服米索前列醇,治疗4周,采用酶联免疫吸附法测定胃粘膜组织PGE2含量。结果瑞巴派特和米索前列醇均能能显著提高非甾体抗炎药相关性胃炎患者胃粘膜组织PGE2含量,改善胃粘膜病变,两组之间的差异无统计学意义(P0.05);但瑞巴派特对患者临床症状的改善优于米索前列醇,差别有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论瑞巴派特能显著提高NSAIDs相关性胃炎患者胃粘膜组织PGE2含量。     

Antireflux surgery vs medical treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease: A meta-analysis

AIM: To compare the effect of antireflux surgery with medicine in treating gastroesophageal reflux disease(GERD) patients using meta- analysis.METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. We only included randomized controlled trials(RCTs) comparing the effect of surgical intervention with medical therapy for GERD. Statistical analyses were performed using Rev Man 5.2 and STATA 12.0 software. Rev Man 5.2 was used to assess the risk of bias and calculate the pooled effect size, while Stata 12.0 was used to evaluate publication bias and for sensitivity analysis. We evaluated the primary outcomes with GERD-/health-related quality of life in short(one to three years) and long(three to twelve years) periods of follow-up. Secondary outcomes evaluated were De Meester scores and the percentage of time that p H 4 to evaluate the degree of acid exposure.RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 7 studies with 1972 patients. It showed a positive effect of antireflux surgery compared with medical treatment in terms of health-related quality of life [standardized mean difference(SMD) = 0.18; 95%CI: 0.01 to 0.34] and GERD-related quality of life(SMD = 0.35; 95%CI: 0.11 to 0.59). We also conducted the subgroup analyses based on follow-up periods and found that surgery remained more effective than medicine over the short to medium follow-up time, but the advantage of antireflux surgery probably not maintained for long time. GERD-related quality of life in the surgical group was significantly higher than medical group for the 3 years follow-up(SMD = 0.45; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.66); the difference was not statistically significant when the follow-up time was ≥ 3 years(SMD = 0.30; 95%CI:-0.10 to 0.69). Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant difference between thesurgical group and medical group in the percentage of time that p H 4(SMD = 0.38; 95%CI: 0.14 to 0.61). Meta-analysis indicated a positive effect of antireflux surgery compared with medical treatment concerning De Meester scores(SMD = 0.32; 95%CI: 0.00 to 0.65).CONCLUSION: Although both were effective, in some respects surgical intervention was more effective than medical therapy to treat GERD when follow-up time was up to three years.     

Shengmai injection as an adjunctive therapy for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of Shengmai injection for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) through an evidence-based approach.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of Shengmai injection on COPD were included in this study. Seven electronic databases were searched to obtain eligible studies. The quality of the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. When appropriate, meta-analysis of the data was conducted by RevMan 5.3 software and Stata 13.0 software. The relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CIs) were reported for dichotomous or continuous outcomes, respectively. Sensitivity analysis was performed to verify the independence of the results. Funnel plots and the Begg and Egger tests were implemented to determine the potential publication bias.ResultsUltimately, 23 RCTs were included, involving 1804 participants. Meta-analysis showed that the combination of Shengmai injection and western medicine (WM) could achieve a better effect than WM alone in terms of improving the clinical total effective rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CIs: 1.15–1.24), pulmonary function (FEV₁(L): MD = 0.41, 95% CIs 0.32 to 0.49; FEV₁(%): MD = 6.21, 95% CIs: 2.72–9.71), blood gas index (PaO₂: MD = 6.13, 95% CIs: 2.93–9.32; PaCO₂: MD=-6.2, 95% CIs: -11.63 to -0.77), immunoglobulin levels (IgG: MD = 3.55, 95% CIs: 3.10–3.99; IgA: MD = 0.34, 95% CIs: 0.31to 0.38; IgM: MD = 0.35, 95% CIs: 0.27 to 0.42), C-reactive protein levels (MD = −8.05, 95% CIs: −10.11 to −6.00) and the lung rale disappearance time (MD = −2.57, 95% CIs: -3.19 to -1.95). Additionally, the CAT score, mMRC and average hospitalization time were also reduced significantly by Shengmai injection plus WM. Among 11 RCTs that mentioned safety issues, 6 RCTs found no adverse events, and the other 5 RCTs reported the details of adverse events.ConclusionShengmai injection may positively influence COPD in combination with WM. However, firm conclusions could not be draw due to the low quality of the evidence. Further high-quality studies are still required to test the efficacy of Shengmai injection for this condition.     

Effect of enhanced recovery after surgery on inflammatory bowel disease surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUNDThe purpose of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) was to reduce surgical pressure and accelerate postoperative functional recovery. Although the application of biologics in treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has changed treatment strategies, most patients with IBD still require surgery.AIMTo evaluate the advantage of ERAS in IBD surgery.METHODSThe PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to March 21, 2021 to find eligible studies. The primary outcome was postoperative complications, and the secondary outcomes included operation time, time to first flatus, time to bowel movement, postoperative hospital stay and readmission. The PROSPERO registration ID of this meta-analysis is CRD42021238052.RESULTSA total of eight studies involving 1939 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There were no differences in baseline information between the ERAS group and the non-ERAS group. After pooling up all of the data, no significant difference was found between the ERAS group and the non-ERAS group in terms of postoperative overall complications [odds ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.66 to 1.02, P = 0.08]. The ERAS group had a lower prevalence of anastomotic fistula (odds ratio = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.13 to 0.95, P = 0.04), less time to first flatus [mean difference (MD) = -2.03, 95%CI = -3.89 to -0.17, P = 0.03], less time to bowel movement (MD = -1.08, 95%CI = -1.60 to -0.57, P < 0.01) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD = -1.99, 95%CI = -3.27 to -0.71, P < 0.01) than the non-ERAS group.CONCLUSIONERAS was effective for the quicker recovery in IBD surgery and did not lead to increased complications.     

Periodontal disease is associated with increased coronary heart disease risk: A meta-analysis based on 38 case-control studies

AIM: To investigate whether periodontal disease (PD) is associated with increasing coronary heart disease (CHD) risk by performing a meta-analysis. METHODS: Two authors independently searched PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure up to January 10^th, 2013 for relevant case-control studies that investigated the association between PD and CHD. After quality assessment using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and data extraction by two independent authors, the overall and subgroup meta-analyses were performed and publication bias were examined using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V2 software. Potential publication bias was assessed using visual inspection of the funnel plots, Egger linear regression test, and trims and fill method. RESULTS: Finally 38 relevant case-control studies were identified, involving 4950 CHD patients and 5490 controls. Eleven studies were rated low quality and 27 were high quality. Based on random-effects, a significant association was identified between PD and CHD (OR 3.79, 95%CI: 2.23-6.43, P < 0.001, I² = 98.59%), and sensitivity analysis showed that this result was robust. Subgroup analyses according to adjusted/unadjusted ORs, source of control, methodological quality, end point, assessment of PD/CHD, and ethnicity also indicated a significant association. Publication bias was detected, and the estimated OR including the “missing” studies did not substantially differ from our estimate with adjustment for missing studies (OR 4.15, 95%CI: 2.62-6.54, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on the meta-analysis, PD is probably associated with CHD risk independently and significantly.     

Efficacy of Liuzijue Qigong in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundLiuzijue is a traditional Qigong exercise that is commonly performed in China. However, the treatment effects of Liuzijue Qigong are controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of Liuzijue Qigong in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).MethodsRandomised controlled trials were identified by searching several English and Chinese databases from inception to August 8, 2020. Study selection and data extraction were independently performed by two investigators. Data synthesis and analysis were carried out with Review Manager software 5.2. Quality assessment for each study was based on the modified Jadad scale.ResultsForty studies with 3137 participants were included. Significant improvements were observed in the following outcomes (mean difference, 95% confidence interval): forced expiratory volume in 1 s (0.17, 0.09–0.25) and its percent predicted normal value (6.04, 3.43–8.65), forced expiratory volume in 1 s to forced volume capacity ratio (6.95, 3.06–10.83), 6-min walking distance (33.06, 23.73–42.38), 30-s sit-to-stand test (2.65, 0.98–4.32), COPD assessment test score (− 2.04, − 2.77 to − 1.30), modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (− 0.34, − 0.48 to − 0.20), Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (− 0.37, − 0.57 to − 0.18), Traditional Chinese Medicine syndrome score (− 1.85, − 2.86 to − 0.85), Hamilton Anxiety Scale (− 2.31, − 3.04 to − 1.59), Hamilton Depression Scale (− 2.08, − 2.45 to − 1.71) and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (− 6.94, − 9.20 to − 4.67).ConclusionsLiuzijue Qigong may be an effective adjuvant therapy for the improvement of lung function, exercise capacity, health status, mental status and quality of life in patients with COPD.     

慢性肾脏病患者衰弱发生率的Meta分析CSCD

目的系统评价慢性肾脏病(chronic kidney disease,CKD)患者衰弱发生率。方法检索The Cochrane Library、PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和中国知网、维普、万方、中国生物医学文献数据库中CKD患者衰弱发生率的观察性研究,检索时限为建库至2021年3月30日,采用Stata 16.0进行Meta分析。结果纳入30项研究,共9496名患者。Meta分析结果显示CKD患者衰弱发生率为32.5%(ES=0.325,95%CI:0.261~0.390,P<0.001),衰弱前期发生率为39.6%(ES=0.396,95%CI:0.348~0.444,P<0.001)。结论CKD患者衰弱和衰弱前期发生率均较高。不同地区、性别、治疗方式、评估工具的CKD患者衰弱发生率均存在差别,医护人员应尽早评估患者衰弱现状,制定干预计划,以延缓衰弱的发生和进展。     

Clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine versus placebo for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveRandomized clinical trials and published meta-analyses assessing the clinical effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) on the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) yielded inconsistent results in terms of disease outcomes, in which the design of placebo-controlled studies can contribute to the heterogeneity. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CHM compared to placebo on the treatment of stable COPD, to provide robust evidence for the use of CHM in COPD.MethodsNine electronic databases were searched from inception to October 1, 2019 to identify placebo controlled randomized trials of CHM for the treatment of stable COPD and studies in English or Chinese were included. The primary outcomes were symptom score (CAT score), quality of life (SGRQ) and frequency of acute exacerbations. The secondary outcomes included lung function, clinical total effective rate and adverse events. The selection of studies, data extraction and coding and assessment of risk of bias of the included studies were conducted by two reviewers independently. Mean difference (MD) was used to analyze continuous variable and relative risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data.ResultsA total of eleven studies involving 1223 patients were included. While maintaining routine western pharmacotherapies (WP), CHM had significant advantage over the treatment of placebo in improving CAT score (MD -3.93; 95 %CI -6.01 to -1.85) and SGRQ score (MD -6.20; 95 %CI -10.13 to -2.28), reducing the frequency of acute exacerbations (MD -0.78; 95 %CI -1.40 to -0.16) and improving clinical effective rate (RR 1.29; 95 %CI 1.14 to 1.45), but had no significant effect on improving FEV₁%pred (MD 8.18; 95 %CI -4.22 to 20.58). High heterogeneity was found for the changes in exacerbation frequency and FEV₁%pred. No serious adverse events related to CHM were reported.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis of placebo-controlled RCTs demonstrated that the use of CHM in addition to WP could alleviate clinical symptoms, improve quality of life and clinical efficiency and reduce the frequency of exacerbations, which could be an alternative approach for treatment adjustment of COPD. CHM was a relatively safe treatment. These findings need to be verified in future with high-quality clinical trials.