584例胆囊结石排石疗效对比分析  

Comparative Analysis of Therapeutic Effects in Removing Stone in 584 Cases of Cholelithiasis

作　　者：陈伟民[1] 庞晓霞 朱玮华[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江省天台县人民医院 [2]浙江省天台县疗养院

出　　处：《中医杂志》2001年第4期218-219,共2页Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine

摘　　要：为探讨胆囊结石的排石疗效,将584例胆囊结石分设西药、中药、中药加推按运经仪综合疗法3组进行对比观察,西药组口服舒胆通、爱活服通片;中药组用自拟方四金排石汤煎服加口服肝胆结石片;综合组煎服四金排石汤加推按运经仪。结果以综合组排石疗效最为显著,其排净率、总排石率、总有效率分别为16.84％、49.27％、84.82％;中药组次之,3项指标分别为11.29％,37.10％,67.7％,西药组疗效最差,3项指标分别为2.44％,7.32％,43.90％。3组间排净率比较差异有显著(P<0.05),总排石率与总有效率比较差异均有显著性(P<0.01),表明综合疗法是目前临床治疗横径<1.0cm中小结石的较好方法。581 cases of cholelithiasis were assigned to Western medicine group. Chinese herb group and Combined treatment group. The Western medicine group received oral administration of Trepihutorie, Ai Hou Dan Tong Tablet; The Chinese herb group were orally administrated self - formulated prescription Si Jin Pai Shi Decoction and Gan Dan Jie Shi Tablet; The combined treatment group were orally administrated Si Jin Pai Shi Decoction and received treatment with Tui An Yun Jing Instrument. Results showed that the therapeutic effect in the combined treatment group was the best, the all - stone ejection rate, total lithecbole rate and the total effective rate being ]6. 8'i%i, 49. 27%. 84. 82%, respectively; in the Chinese herb group was next, the three indexes being 11. 29%. 37. 10% and 67. 7%, respectively; in the Western medicine group was the worst, the three indexes being 2. 44%, 7. 32% and 43. 90%. respectively. There were significantly differences in the all stone ejection rate (P<0. 05). total lithecbole rate (P <0.01) and the total effective rate (P<0. 01) among the three groups. It is suggested that the combined treatment is a better method for clinical treatment of middle and small stone with transverse diameter less than 1. 0cm at present.

关 键 词：胆囊结石 中医药治疗 排石疗效 比较 

分 类 号：R259.7[医药卫生—中西医结合]