论文部分内容阅读
目的:研究滋阴清热法治疗阴虚内热型系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)的临床疗效。方法:随机选取2014年7月~2016年1月间本院收治系统性红斑狼疮患者100例,其中男女分别为22例和78例,随机成为2组即A组为研究组50例,B组为对照组50例。B组采用醋酸泼尼松+予环磷酰胺治疗方案,A组在B组方案的基础上联合滋阴清热治疗方案,通过A、B两组的治疗效果对比进行分析。结果:A、B两组患者体重的对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A、B两组疾病疗效对比,并通过Ridit进行检验显示A组的总有效率为92.00%比B组的84.00%高,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A、B两组中医证候疗效对比,并通过Ridit进行检验显示A组的总有效率为94.00%比B组的52.00%高,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A组患者治疗前后的SLE-DAI评分别为(9.63±2.84)和(3.74±0.57),且治疗前后对比差异有统计学意义(P=0.001);B组患者治疗前后的SLE-DAI评分别为(9.38±2.53)和(4.62±1.31),且治疗前后对比有明显差异(P=0.003)。A组和B组间治疗前的对比,有明显差异(P=0.712);A组和B组间治疗后的对比有明显差异(P=0.031)。A组患者治疗前后中医临床证候积分评分别为(9.6313.86±5.27)和(3.67±1.54),且治疗前后对比差异有统计学意义(P=0.002);B组患者治疗前后的中医临床证候积分评分别为(14.02±5.68)和(6.48±2.86),且治疗前后对比有明显差异(P=0.004)。A组和B组间治疗前的对比,有明显差异(P=0.827);A组和B组间治疗后的对比,有明显差异(P=0.027)。A、B两组内的治疗前后实验室指标对比,通过χ2检验后有明显差异(P<0.05)。A、B两组间的治疗后对比有明显差异(P<0.05)。A、B两组间治疗前的激素使用情况对比,差异无统计学意义(P=0.082);A、B两组间治疗后的激素使用情况对比,差异有统计学意义(P=0.002);A、B两组间激素撤减量对比,差异有统计学意义(P=0.035)。结论:A组的治疗方案比B组的方案治疗效果好,值得推广。
Objective: To study the clinical curative effect of Ziyinqingre treatment on the treatment of yin deficiency endogenous heat systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: A total of 100 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were randomly selected from July 2014 to January 2016 in our hospital. Among them, 22 were male and female, and 78 were randomized into two groups. Group A was randomized into study group 50 and group B For the control group of 50 cases. Group B was treated with prednisone acetate + cyclophosphamide. Group A was treated with combination of nourishing yin and clearing heat treatment on the basis of group B, and the therapeutic effects of group A and B were compared. Results: There was no significant difference in body weight between A and B groups (P> 0.05). A, B compared the efficacy of the two groups of diseases, and by Ridit test showed that the total effective rate was 92.00% in group A compared with 84.00% in group B, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). A, B two groups of TCM syndromes efficacy comparison, and by Ridit test showed that the total effective rate of group A was 94.00% higher than 52.00% of group B, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). The SLE-DAI scores of patients in group A before and after treatment were (9.63 ± 2.84) and (3.74 ± 0.57), respectively, and the differences were statistically significant before and after treatment (P = 0.001). The SLE-DAI scores of patients in group B before and after treatment were (9.38 ± 2.53) and (4.62 ± 1.31) respectively, with significant difference before and after treatment (P = 0.003). There was a significant difference (P = 0.712) between group A and group B before treatment; there was a significant difference between group A and group B after treatment (P = 0.031). Before and after treatment, the scores of TCM syndromes in patients in group A were (9.6313.86 ± 5.27) and (3.67 ± 1.54) before and after treatment, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant before and after treatment (P = 0.002) The scores of syndromes were (14.02 ± 5.68) and (6.48 ± 2.86) respectively, with significant difference before and after treatment (P = 0.004). There was a significant difference (P = 0.827) between group A and group B before treatment; there was a significant difference between group A and group B after treatment (P = 0.027). A, B within the two groups before and after treatment in laboratory indicators, by χ2 test significant difference (P <0.05). A, B after treatment between the two groups were significantly different (P <0.05). There was no significant difference in the use of hormones between groups A and B before treatment (P = 0.082). There was a significant difference in the use of hormones between groups A and B after treatment (P = 0.002). A, B between the two groups of hormone withdrawal compared, the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.035). Conclusion: The treatment of group A is more effective than the treatment of group B and is worth promoting.