CAJ | 학술논문

目的：观察血必净注射液联合头孢硫脒注射液治疗急性盆腔腹膜炎的临床效果。方法选取94例急性盆腔腹膜炎患者，随机分为研究组和对照组，各47例。研究组应用血必净（50 mL /次，2次/日）联合头孢硫脒（1.5 g /次，1次/日）治疗，对照组只用头孢硫脒（1.5 g /次，1次/日）治疗，两组疗程均为14 d。1个月后评价中医症状改善情况，判定临床疗效与炎性指标变化。结果治疗后，研究组与对照组在恶寒[（1.18±0.49)分比(1.84±0.73分)]、发热[(0.79±0.32)分比(1.32±0.57分)]、咳嗽[(1.35±0.46)分比(1.87±0.41)分 ]，月经[（1.77±0.55)分比(2.08±0.45)分 ]，带下[(1.75±0.54)分比(2.01±0.62 )分 ]等中医症状积分比较，差异均具有统计学意义（ P ﹤0.05）；研究组治愈率为48.94%显著高于对照组的23.40%（ P ﹤0.05），两组临床总有效率（93.62%比87.23%）比较，差异无统计学意义（ P ﹥0.05)；两组治疗后白细胞总数[(7.37±2.31)×109/ L 比(9.88±2.43)×109]、C 反应蛋白（CRP）[（7.29±2.20）mg / L 比（9.38±2.15）mg / L]、降钙素原（PCT）[(14.35±3.44) ng / L 比(16.82±4.58) ng / L]、白细胞介素6（IL －6）[(137.62±25.21) ng / L 比(152.72±28.61) ng / L]等炎症指标比较，差异显著（ P ﹤0.05）；两组患者在治疗期及随访期间均未见明显不良反应，安全性评价为1 级。结论急性盆腔腹膜炎患者应用血必净联合头孢硫脒治疗，效果优于单用头孢硫脒，尤其在中医症状改善方面表现出显著优势，且临床安全性较高。
목적：관찰혈필정주사액연합두포류미주사액치료급성분강복막염적림상효과。방법선취94례급성분강복막염환자，수궤분위연구조화대조조，각47례。연구조응용혈필정（50 mL /차，2차/일）연합두포류미（1.5 g /차，1차/일）치료，대조조지용두포류미（1.5 g /차，1차/일）치료，량조료정균위14 d。1개월후평개중의증상개선정황，판정림상료효여염성지표변화。결과치료후，연구조여대조조재악한[（1.18±0.49)분비(1.84±0.73분)]、발열[(0.79±0.32)분비(1.32±0.57분)]、해수[(1.35±0.46)분비(1.87±0.41)분 ]，월경[（1.77±0.55)분비(2.08±0.45)분 ]，대하[(1.75±0.54)분비(2.01±0.62 )분 ]등중의증상적분비교，차이균구유통계학의의（ P ﹤0.05）；연구조치유솔위48.94%현저고우대조조적23.40%（ P ﹤0.05），량조림상총유효솔（93.62%비87.23%）비교，차이무통계학의의（ P ﹥0.05)；량조치료후백세포총수[(7.37±2.31)×109/ L 비(9.88±2.43)×109]、C 반응단백（CRP）[（7.29±2.20）mg / L 비（9.38±2.15）mg / L]、강개소원（PCT）[(14.35±3.44) ng / L 비(16.82±4.58) ng / L]、백세포개소6（IL －6）[(137.62±25.21) ng / L 비(152.72±28.61) ng / L]등염증지표비교，차이현저（ P ﹤0.05）；량조환자재치료기급수방기간균미견명현불량반응，안전성평개위1 급。결론급성분강복막염환자응용혈필정연합두포류미치료，효과우우단용두포류미，우기재중의증상개선방면표현출현저우세，차림상안전성교고。
Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of Xuebijing Injection combined with Cefathiamidine Injection in the treatment of acute pelvic peritonitis. Methods 94 selected patients with acute pelvic peritonitis were randomly divided into the study group and the control group, 47 cases each. The study group was given the regimen of Xuebijing Injection (50 mL, twice daily) combined with Cefathi-amidine Injection(1. 5 g, once daily), while the control group was only given cefathiamidine(1. 5 g, once daily). The two groups were treat-ed for 14 d. The improvement of Chinese medicine symptoms after 1 month was evaluated. The clinical effects and the changes of the inflammatory indexes were also evaluated. Results The Chinese medicine symptom integrals after treatment had statistical differences in chills (1. 18 ± 0. 49 vs. 1. 84 ± 0. 73), fever (0. 79 ± 0. 32 vs. 1. 32 ± 0. 57), cough (1. 35 ± 0. 46 vs. 1. 87 ± 0. 41), menstruation (1. 77 ± 0. 55 vs. 2. 08 ± 0. 45) and leucorrhea (1. 75 ± 0. 54 vs. 2. 01 ± 0. 62) between the two groups( P ﹤ 0. 05); the cure rate of the study group was significantly higher than that of the control group(48. 94% vs. 23. 4% , P ﹤ 0. 05), but the clinical total effective rates had no statistical difference between the two groups (93. 62% vs. 87. 23% , P ﹥ 0. 05); the inflammatory indexes of total white blood cells (WBC) count [ (7. 37 ± 2. 31) × 109 / L vs. (9. 88 ± 2. 43) × 109 ], C - reactive protein (CRP) [ (7. 29 ± 2. 20) mg / L vs. (9. 38 ± 2. 15)mg / L], procalcitonin (PCT) [ (14. 35 ± 3. 44) ng / L vs. (16. 82 ± 4. 58) ng / L] and interleukin - 6 (IL - 6) [ (137. 62 ± 25. 21) ng / L vs. (152. 72 ± 28. 61)ng / L] had statistical differences between the two groups( P ﹤ 0. 05); there were no obvious adverse reactions during the treatment period and following - up in the two groups, the safety evaluation was the grade 1. Conclusion Xuebijing Injection combined with Cefathiamidine Injection has better effect for treating acute pelvic peritonitis than single cefathiamidine, shows the significant advan-tage especially in the aspect of the TCM syndromes improvement, moreover has few adverse reactions and higher clinical safety.