系统评价促胃肠动力药物治疗FD的临床疗效及安全性
|
摘要
目的系统评价促胃肠动力药物治疗功能性消化不良(FD)的临床疗效及安全性。方法本次研究选取2016年5月12日～2017年5月12日期间进行治疗的FD患者,将120例患者随机分为两组,每组60例。将实施多潘立酮的患者纳入对照组,将采用伊托必利的患者设为观察组。将两组FD患者的临床效果、症状缓解情况、不良反应发生情况进行对比。结果观察组FD患者治疗4周后的症状缓解情况、临床总有效率均高于对照组患者(P <0.05),两组FD患者的不良反应发生率对比差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。结论促胃肠动力药物应用在FD患者的治疗中安全性较高,但伊托必利的疗效比多潘立酮更优。
Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal promotility drug in the treatment of functional dyspepsia(FD).Methods The subjects of this study were FD patients treated from May 12, 2016 to May 12, 2017. 120 patients were randomly divided into two groups, 60 cases in each group. Patients received domperidone were enrolled in the control group and patients received etopril were assigned to the observation group. The clinical effects, symptoms relief and adverse reactions of FD patients in the two groups were compared. Results The symptoms relief and clinical total effective rate of FD patients in the observation group were higher than those in the control group after 4 weeks of treatment(P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups(P > 0.05). Conclusion Gastrointestinal promotility drug are safe in the treatment of FD, but itopride is more effective than domperidone.
Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal promotility drug in the treatment of functional dyspepsia(FD).Methods The subjects of this study were FD patients treated from May 12, 2016 to May 12, 2017. 120 patients were randomly divided into two groups, 60 cases in each group. Patients received domperidone were enrolled in the control group and patients received etopril were assigned to the observation group. The clinical effects, symptoms relief and adverse reactions of FD patients in the two groups were compared. Results The symptoms relief and clinical total effective rate of FD patients in the observation group were higher than those in the control group after 4 weeks of treatment(P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups(P > 0.05). Conclusion Gastrointestinal promotility drug are safe in the treatment of FD, but itopride is more effective than domperidone.
引文
[1]陈萍.促胃肠动力药物治疗功能性消化不良的系统评价[J].中国医药指南,2016,14(10):156.
[2]刘天保,刘战河,吴玉叶.宁胃消郁汤联合促胃肠动力、抑酸和抗躯体化症状疗法在功能性消化不良患者中的疗效研究[J].成都医学院学报,2017,12(3):302-305.
[3]陈吉辉,李志华.双歧杆菌三联活菌联合莫沙必利治疗功能性消化不良患者的疗效观察[J].吉林医学,2016,37(8):1907-1909.
[4]吴晓尉,季洪赞,许莲娥,等.六味安消胶囊对比胃肠促动力药治疗功能性消化不良的Meta分析[J].胃肠病学和肝病学杂志,2015,24(6):662-666.
[5]张旭栋,范一宏,沈佳佳,等.不同作用机制药物对功能性消化不良疗效特点的对照研究[J].胃肠病学,2017,22(8):469-473.
[2]刘天保,刘战河,吴玉叶.宁胃消郁汤联合促胃肠动力、抑酸和抗躯体化症状疗法在功能性消化不良患者中的疗效研究[J].成都医学院学报,2017,12(3):302-305.
[3]陈吉辉,李志华.双歧杆菌三联活菌联合莫沙必利治疗功能性消化不良患者的疗效观察[J].吉林医学,2016,37(8):1907-1909.
[4]吴晓尉,季洪赞,许莲娥,等.六味安消胶囊对比胃肠促动力药治疗功能性消化不良的Meta分析[J].胃肠病学和肝病学杂志,2015,24(6):662-666.
[5]张旭栋,范一宏,沈佳佳,等.不同作用机制药物对功能性消化不良疗效特点的对照研究[J].胃肠病学,2017,22(8):469-473.