检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
出 处:《中国医药导刊》2010年第3期355-356,共2页Chinese Journal of Medicinal Guide
摘 要:目的:随着含铋剂四联疗法根除幽门螺杆菌(Helicobacter pylori,Hp)疗效的下降,临床上需要新的补救治疗方案,本研究比较了不同疗程的莫西沙星三联疗法补救治疗Hp的疗效和安全性。方法:将Hp感染经常规三联疗法治疗失败的89例患者随机分为A组(45例)和B组(44例)。两组患者均给予含莫西沙星的三联疗法(莫西沙星+雷贝拉唑钠肠溶片+阿莫西林),A组患者疗程为7天,B组患者疗程10天,治疗结束后4周做^(13)C尿素酶呼气试验进行比较。结果:A组41例完成治疗及随访,其中33例补救治疗成功;B组38例完成治疗及随访,32例根除治疗成功,A、B两组的ITT根除率分别为73.3%和72.7%,其PP根除率分别为80.5%和84.2%。两组根除率比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:7天与10天莫西沙星三联疗法根除率无明显差异,Hp补救治疗可选用7天莫西沙星三联方案。Objective:Helicobacter pytori eradication rates achieved by bismuth-based quadruple therapy are decreasing and there is an urgent need for new effeclive rescue therapies.The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 7-day and 10-day moxifloxaein-based triple therapy as an second-line treatment.Methods:A total of 89 patients,in whom the initial standard PPI triple therapy had failed to eradicate H. pylori infection.were included in the study.Patients were randomized to a 7-day treatment group (rabeprazole 10rag twice daily, moxifloxacin 400mg/day, amoxiciltin 1 000mg twice daily for 7 days) or to a 10-day treatment group (the same regimen as the 7-day group but for 10 days).The eradication rates and side-effect rates of these two groups were compared.Results:The eradication rates were 73.3% (33/45] and 80.5% (33/41) with 7-day moxifloxacin-based triple therapy.and 72.7% (32/44) and 84.2% (32/38) with 10-day therapy, by intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses (P〉0.05),respectively.Incidences of adverse events were comparable.Conclusion:Because the 7-day moxifloxacin-containing triple therapy is not inferior to the 10-day therapy, the 7-day regimen could be an effective option as rescue treatment for H. pylori infection.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.38