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
作 者:黄代鸿[1]
机构地区:[1]中山市中医院,528400
出 处:《国际医药卫生导报》2012年第20期3052-3055,共4页International Medicine and Health Guidance News
摘 要:目的评价中西医结合治疗恶性胸腔积液的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2009年10月至2012年3月我院90例恶性胸腔积液患者,随机分为两组各45例,对照组应用胸腔灌注化疗药物治疗,治疗组给予中西医结合治疗,观察并比较两组临床疗效、毒副反应及患者的生活质量情况。结果治疗组总有效率为86.7%,对照组为62.2%,两组总有效率比较差异具有显著性(P〈0.05)。治疗组患者生活质量改善明显优于对照组(P〈0.05)。治疗后主要不良反应为恶心呕吐、胸痛、发热。治疗组不良反应发生率为8.9%,明显低于对照组的26.7%(P〈0.05)。结论中西医结合治疗恶性胸腔积液能显著提高近期疗效,改善生活质量,值得临床推广。Objective To evaluate the efficacy of combining traditional Chinese and western medicine for treatment of malignant pleural effusion. Methods Retrospective analysis of 90 patients with malignant pleural effusion from October 2009 to March 2012, which were randomly divided into two groups, control group received intrapleural perfusion chemotherapy, treatment group received combiningtraditional Chinese and western medicine. Clinical efficacy and incidence of adverse reaction were compared between them. Results The total effective ratio in treatment group was 86.7%. The control group was 62. 2%. There were significant differences in total effective ratio between two groups(P〈 0.05). Improvement of life quality in treatment group was better than that in control group(P〈 0.05). The main adverse reactions were nausea and vomiting, chest pain and fever. The incidence of adverse reactions in treatment group was 8.9%, significantly lower than that (26.7%) of the control group (P 〈 0.05). Conclusion Combining traditional Chinese and western medicine can improve short-term clinical effect and quality of life of patients with malignant pleural effusion, which should be worthy of clinical application.
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:216.73.216.3