葛根素注射液与中医药配合中药灌肠治疗慢性肾功能不全临床疗效对比研究  

A Contrast Study of the Clinical Effect of Gegensu Injection and Chinese Traditional Medicine on Chronic Renal Failure

作　　者：邵青[1] 王晓东[2] 

机构地区：[1]黑龙江省中西医结合研究所,哈尔滨150036 [2]哈尔滨医科大学附属第二医院,150086

出　　处：《医学研究杂志》2008年第8期135-136,共2页Journal of Medical Research

摘　　要：目的对比葛根素注射液与传统中医药配合中药灌肠治疗慢性肾功能不全的临床疗效。方法选择应用葛根素注射液治疗的慢性肾功能不全住院患者70例作为A组;选择同期应用传统中医药配合中药灌肠治疗的慢性肾功能不全住院患者60例作为B组。通过对两组病例治疗前后血肌酐和尿素氮实验室检测值的分析,对两种治疗方法进行疗效对比。结果1.A组显效率8.57%、有效率41.42%、无效50%、总有效率50%,B组显效率23.33%、有效率41.67%、无效35%、总有效率65%。2.A组治疗后血肌酐和尿素氮较治疗前比较有显著性差异(P<0.05,P<0.01),B组治疗后血肌酐和尿素氮较治疗前比较有显著性差异(P<0.01,P<0.01)。3.A组与B组两组间比较,B组血肌酐、尿素氮治疗前后下降值较A组下降值明显,具有明显差异(P<0.05)。结论葛根素注射液和传统中医药配合中药灌肠治疗慢性肾功能不全均有明显疗效。其中,传统中医药配合中药灌肠治疗慢性肾功能不全疗效为佳。Objective To compare the effect of Gegensu Injection and Chinese Traditional Medicine on Chronic Renal Failure. Methods 70 cases of Chronic Renal Failure were selected as group A, treated by Gegensu Injection; During the same term,60 cases of Chronic Renal Failure were selected as group B, treated by Chinese Traditional Medicine and Chinese Traditional Medicine Clyster. The effect of two methods were valued by analyzing the numeral value of Scr and BUN in two groups . Results 1. Significant effective rate is 8.57% , effective rate 41.42% , ineffective rate 50% , total effective rate 50% in group A; 23.33% , 41.67% , 35% , 65% in group B. 2. After treatment, the numeral value of Scr and BUN in group A had significant difference （ P 〈 0.05, P 〈 0. O1 ） ; and the numeral value of Scr and BUN in Group B had significant difference too （ P 〈 0. O1 , P 〈 0. 01 ）. 3. Comparing with group A, the descend numeral value of Scr and BUN in Group B were more obvious than A （P 〈 0. 05, P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion The clinical effect in both groups is obvious; and the clinical effect of Group B is better than Group A.

关 键 词：葛根素注射液 传统中医药配合中药灌肠 慢性肾功能不全 疗效评价 

分 类 号：R692.5[医药卫生—泌尿科学] R259.746.2[医药卫生—外科学]