中国临床药理学杂志
中國臨床藥理學雜誌
중국림상약이학잡지
THE CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
2009年
4期
291-293,297
,共4页
马锦芳%赵子文%袁本通%陈平雁%郑劲平
馬錦芳%趙子文%袁本通%陳平雁%鄭勁平
마금방%조자문%원본통%진평안%정경평
盐酸左旋沙丁胺醇%硫酸沙丁胺醇%支气管哮喘
鹽痠左鏇沙丁胺醇%硫痠沙丁胺醇%支氣管哮喘
염산좌선사정알순%류산사정알순%지기관효천
levalbuterol hydrochloride%salbutamol sulphate%asthma
目的 评价盐酸左旋沙丁胺醇(β2受体激动剂,治疗支气管哮喘药)治疗轻、中度支气管哮喘的有效性和安全性.方法 用随机、双盲、对照临床研究,122例轻、中度支气管哮喘患者随机分为2组,试验组口服盐酸左旋沙丁胺醇片1.15 mg,对照组口服硫酸沙丁胺醇2 mg,每日3次,疗程(14±2)天.结果 与治疗前相比,试验组的第1秒用力呼气容积占预计值(FEV1%)、第1秒用力呼气容积值(FEV1)和第1秒用力呼气容积与用力肺活量的比值(FEV1/FVC)均有明显升高,具有显著的统计学差异(P≤0.05);对照组治疗前后无明显变化.试验组与对照组的不良反应发生率分别为12.5%和15.3%,2组间比较无显著性差异.结论 治疗轻中、度支气管哮喘2组具有相同的临床疗效和安全性;但试验组在肺功能改善方面明显优于对照组.
目的 評價鹽痠左鏇沙丁胺醇(β2受體激動劑,治療支氣管哮喘藥)治療輕、中度支氣管哮喘的有效性和安全性.方法 用隨機、雙盲、對照臨床研究,122例輕、中度支氣管哮喘患者隨機分為2組,試驗組口服鹽痠左鏇沙丁胺醇片1.15 mg,對照組口服硫痠沙丁胺醇2 mg,每日3次,療程(14±2)天.結果 與治療前相比,試驗組的第1秒用力呼氣容積佔預計值(FEV1%)、第1秒用力呼氣容積值(FEV1)和第1秒用力呼氣容積與用力肺活量的比值(FEV1/FVC)均有明顯升高,具有顯著的統計學差異(P≤0.05);對照組治療前後無明顯變化.試驗組與對照組的不良反應髮生率分彆為12.5%和15.3%,2組間比較無顯著性差異.結論 治療輕中、度支氣管哮喘2組具有相同的臨床療效和安全性;但試驗組在肺功能改善方麵明顯優于對照組.
목적 평개염산좌선사정알순(β2수체격동제,치료지기관효천약)치료경、중도지기관효천적유효성화안전성.방법 용수궤、쌍맹、대조림상연구,122례경、중도지기관효천환자수궤분위2조,시험조구복염산좌선사정알순편1.15 mg,대조조구복류산사정알순2 mg,매일3차,료정(14±2)천.결과 여치료전상비,시험조적제1초용력호기용적점예계치(FEV1%)、제1초용력호기용적치(FEV1)화제1초용력호기용적여용력폐활량적비치(FEV1/FVC)균유명현승고,구유현저적통계학차이(P≤0.05);대조조치료전후무명현변화.시험조여대조조적불량반응발생솔분별위12.5%화15.3%,2조간비교무현저성차이.결론 치료경중、도지기관효천2조구유상동적림상료효화안전성;단시험조재폐공능개선방면명현우우대조조.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of levalbuterol hydrochloride in the treatment of mild - moderate asthma. Methods Randomized double -blind, control clinical study was carried out. One hundred twenty- two mild- moderate asthma patients were randomized to enroll the study. Trial group was treated with oral Ievalbuterol hydrochlo-ride tablets 1.15 nag thrice daily. Control group was treated with oral sal-butamol sulphate tablets 2 mg thrice daily. The therapy window is ( 14 ±2) d. Results Comparison with baseline, the first forced expiratory vol-ume vs predicted( FEV1% ), the first forced expiratory volume (FEV1)and the first forced expiratory volume vs the forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) were obviously improved in trial group. There is significantly statis-ties difference (P≤0. 05 ). Control group has no significant variance pre and post treatment. Drug adverse reaction of trial group and control group is 12.5% and 15.3% ,respectively. There is no marked difference between two groups. Conclusion Two groups are equivalent in the treatment of mild to moderate asthma, moreover, lung function has been more improved greatly in trial group compared with control group.