机构地区:[1]山东省荣成市人民医院 [2]泰山医学院附属荣成医院消化内科,荣成市264300 [3]泰山医学院附属荣成医院皮肤激光科,荣成市264300
出 处:《中国激光医学杂志》2014年第3期145-150,共6页Chinese Journal of Laser Medicine & Surgery
摘 要:目的比较镓铝砷(galliumaluminiumarsenide,GaAIAs)半导体激光和He—Ne激光穴位照射治疗小儿慢性腹泻(infantilechron.icdiarrhea,ICD)的疗效。方法ICD患儿100例,随机分为两组:半导体激光照射组50例,其中小肠病变和结肠病变各25例;He-Ne激光穴位照射组50例,其中小肠病变23例和结肠病变27例。半导体激光组,照射波长830nm,取神阙、双侧大肠俞和天枢穴,功率密度318mW/cm2,每穴照射10min,每日1次,10次为1个疗程,均治疗两个疗程。He-Ne激光组,照射波长632.8nm,治疗方法同半导体激光组。治疗结束后,比较两组患儿的临床疗效。结果半导体激光组,治愈38例(76.O%),好转9例(18.0%),无效3例(6.0%);He-Ne激光组治愈27例(54.0%),好转13例(26.0%),无效10例(加.0%),半导体激光组疗效好于He-Ne激光组(P〈0.05)。结果表明,年龄〉5岁、病程3—5个月患儿均以半导体激光组疗效较好(P〈0.05);两组均以小肠病变疗效好于结肠病变(P〈0.01);治疗后排便平均次数,半导体激光组少于He-Ne激光组(P〈0.05)。结论镓铝砷半导体激光穴位照射治疗ICD疗效好于He-Ne激光组,可作为激光穴位照射治疗ICD的首选方法。Objective To compare the effects of GaAlAs semiconductor laser and He-Ne laser irradiation at acupoints on infantile chronic diarrhea (ICD).Methods Altogether 100 children with ICD were divided randomly and equally into the GaALas semiconductor laser group (n = 50, half of which had pathologic change on small intestine and the rest half on colon) and He-Ne laser group (n = 50, 23 with pathologic change on small intestine and 27 on colon). The children in the semiconductor laser group were irradiated with semiconductor laser (wavelength: 830 nm; power density: 318 mW/cm2 ) directly onto $henque (REN8), and bilateral Tianshu (ST25) and Dachangshu (BL25) acupoints. Each acupoint was irradiated for 10 rain per day, each course lasted for 10 days, and each child received two cour- ses of the treatment. The patients in the He-Ne laser group were treated with He-Ne laser (wavelength: 632. 8 nm), which irradiated the acupoints through fiberoptic coupling cable. The selection of acupoints, duration of irradiation, power density of laser and course of treatment were as same as those in the semiconductor laser group. After the treatment, the children of beth groups were reexamined to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of the two groups respectively. Results For the semiconductor laser group, 38 children (76%) were cured, 9 children ( 18% ) were improved and 3 children (6%) had no improvement. As to the He-Ne laser group, 27 children (54%) were cured, 13 children (26%) were improved and 1O chil- dren (20%) had no improvement. The therapeutic effect of the semiconductor laser group was obviously better than of the He-Ne laser group (P 〈0. 05). For the children whose age were above 5 years and whose illness course lasted for 3-5 months, the therapeutic effect of the semiconductor laser group was better than that of the He-Ne laser group (P 〈 0. 05 ). In beth groups, the therapeutic effect on pathologic change on small intestine was better than that on col
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...