清溃愈疡方保留灌肠治疗大肠湿热型溃疡性结肠炎的临床疗效研究  

Clinical study of Qingkui Yuyang prescription enema treatment on ulcerative colitis with damp-heat in large intestine

作　　者：张卿[1] 魏引廷[1] 陈允旺[1] Zhang Qing;Wei Yinting;Chen Yunwang(Department of Gastroenterology,Lianyungang Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Lianyungang 222000,Jiangsu,China)

机构地区：[1]南京中医药大学连云港附属医院消化内科,江苏连云港222000

出　　处：《中国中西医结合急救杂志》2018年第5期511-514,共4页Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine in Intensive and Critical Care

基　　金：江苏省连云港市医药卫生科研项目（201512）

摘　　要：目的 观察清溃愈疡方保留灌肠治疗对大肠湿热型溃疡性结肠炎患者临床疗效的影响.方法 选择南京中医药大学连云港附属医院消化内科2015年3月20日至2017年7月20日收治的120例溃疡性结肠炎患者,将患者按治疗方法不同分为对照组、美沙拉嗪灌肠组、锡类散灌肠组和中药灌肠组,每组30例.对照组口服美沙拉嗪治疗,美沙拉嗪灌肠组在对照组基础上加用美沙拉嗪灌肠治疗,锡类散灌肠组在对照组基础上加用锡类散灌肠治疗,中药灌肠组在对照组基础上加用清溃愈疡方灌肠治疗.4组疗程均为4周,随访3个月.比较4组治疗前后症状积分、Baron内镜评分、生活质量评分和临床疗效、不良反应发生率以及复发率的差异.结果 4组治疗前症状积分、Baron内镜评分、生活质量评分比较差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0.05）;4组治疗后症状积分和Baron内镜评分均较治疗前降低,生活质量评分较治疗前升高,且中药灌肠组和美沙拉嗪灌肠组上述指标的变化较对照组和锡类散灌肠组更显著〔腹痛积分（分）：1.74±0.17、1.79±0.18比2.88±0.23、2.42±0.21,腹泻积分（分）：1.84±0.19、1.81±0.20比2.72±0.25、2.51±0.25,脓血便积分（分）：1.75±0.20、1.69±0.16比2.83±0.27、2.39±0.24,Baron内镜评分（分）：0.54±0.04、0.52±0.05比0.94±0.09、0.73±0.06,生活质量评分（分）：166.54±15.24、167.52±16.05比141.94±14.09、150.73±15.06〕,中药灌肠组和美沙拉嗪灌肠组临床疗效均高于对照组〔93.3％（28/30）、90.0％（27/30）比70.0％（21/30）,均P〈0.05〕,中药灌肠组与美沙拉嗪灌肠组上述指标比较差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0.05）.中药灌肠组和锡类散灌肠组均未出现不良反应,对照组和美沙拉嗪灌肠组各出现1例腹痛和便秘;4组均未发现严重不良反应.随访发现,对照组、锡类散灌肠组、美沙拉嗪灌肠组和中药灌肠组复发率分别为58.33％（Objective To observe the effect of Qingkui Yuyang prescription enema on clinical efficacy for treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis accompanied by damp-heat in intestine. Methods One hundred and twenty patients with ulcerative colitis damp-heat in intestine admitted to Department of Gastroenterology of Lianyungang Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine （TCM） from May 20th, 2015 to July 20th, 2017 were enrolled, they were divided into four groups： control, mesalazine enema, Xilei powder enema and TCM enema groups according to the difference in therapeutic methods, 30 cases in each group. The control group and all the other three treatment groups were given oral mesalazine, in addition, the mesalazine enema group was treated with mesalamine enema, the Xilei powder enema group was treated with Xilei powder enema, while the TCM enema group was treated with Qingkui Yuyang prescription enema. The four groups were treated for 4 weeks, and followed up for 3 months. The differences of symptom scores, Baron endoscopic scores and quality of life scores, clinical efficacy and the adverse reaction rate of the four groups were compared after treatment and the recurrence rate in the follow up of the four groups were also compared. Results There were no significant differences in symptom scores, Baron endoscopic scores, and quality of life scores among the four groups before treatment （all P 〉 0.05）; After treatment, the symptom scores and Baron endoscopic scores of the four groups were lower than those before treatment, and the quality of life scores were increased compared with that before treatment in the four groups, the changes of the above indexes in the TCM enema group and the mesalazine enema group were more significant than those in the control group and the Xilei powder enema group （abdominal pain scores： 1.74±0.17, 1.79±0.18 vs. 2.88±0.23, 2.42±0.21, diarrhea score： 1.84±0.19, 1.81±0.20 vs. 2.72±0.25, 2.51±0.25, bloody purulent stool score： 1.75±0

关 键 词：中药清溃愈疡方 溃疡性结肠炎 灌肠 临床疗效 

分 类 号：R725.164[医药卫生—儿科]