目的 对比中成药镇痛活络酊和非甾体抗炎药(Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs,NSAIDs)治疗肱骨外上髁炎(lateral epicondylitis,LE)的短期临床疗效差异。方法 筛选后符合纳入标准的LE患者60例,随机分为镇痛活络酊组(n=30)和NSAIDs组(n=30)。镇痛活络酊组外用镇痛活络酊,NSAIDs组外用法斯通凝胶(酮洛芬),两组均连续用药3周,3次/d。用药后3 周、6 周和12 周连续随访,主要观测指标包括视觉模拟评分(visual analog scale,VAS);肩、肘和手的功能评分(Disabilities of the arm, Shoulder And Hand,DASH);无痛握力(Pain-free grip strength,PFGS)。VAS评分分别测量患者1周前用力活动时的VAS评分和正常休息时的VAS评分,记为VAS(活动时)和VAS(休息时)。运用统计学方法对比分析两组患者在VAS评分(活动时)、VAS评分(休息时)、DASH评分和PFGS上的差异。结果 两组患者在VAS评分(活动时)、VAS评分(休息时)和DASH评分上均未见组间差异(P>0.05)。两组患者在用药前、用药后3周、用药后6周的PGFS对比同样无组间差异(P=0.91,P=0.42,P=0.13)。但是,在用药后12周,镇痛活络酊组的PFGS高于NSAIDs组(P=0.02)。结论 镇痛活络酊缓解LE疼痛的效果与外用NSAIDs相当,对提升伸肌力效果则更优。

Objective To compare the short-term clinical effects difference between analgesic tincture and topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE). Methods 60 cases of LE patients were randomly divided into an analgesic tincture group (n=30) and a NSAIDs group (n=30). Analgesic tincture was chosen for the analgesic tincture group and topical ketoprofen gel for the NSAIDs group to treat LE. Two groups were treated continuously for 3w, 3 times/day. Clinical results of each drug were followed-up at the time point of 3w, 6w and 12w after usage. Observational indexes included the visual analogue scale (VAS), disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (DASH) and pain-free grip strength (PFGS). The inter-group difference of VAS (at activity), VAS (at rest), DASH score and PFGS were compared subsequently. Results No difference of the VAS (at activity), VAS (at rest), DASH score were ascertained (P> 0.05) between groups. Inter-group difference of PGFS was also not discerned at the time points of pre-treatment and 3 weeks and 6 weeks (P=0.91, P=0.42, P=0.13) post-treatment. However, PFGS of the analgesic tincture group was found to be higher than that of the NSAIDs group (P=0.02) after 12 weeks post-treatment. Conclusion Effect of analgesic tincture in releasing pain is almost the same to that of tropical NSAIDs, but a better effect in improving muscle strength.

目的 观察恩替卡韦治疗e抗原阳性慢性乙型病毒性肝炎慢加急性肝衰竭(CHB-ACLF)的近期疗效及安全性。方法 选择e抗原阳性CHB-ACLF患者60例,均为我院2016年6月—2017年6月收诊,随机分为各30例的治疗组(采用恩替卡韦治疗)与对照组(采用拉米夫定片治疗),连续用药6个月后,对比疗效及安全性差异。结果 治疗6个月后,治疗组的ALB、PTA水平高于对照组,TBIL、ALT水平低于对照组,MELD评分与HBV-DNA定量少于对照组(P＜0.05);治疗后6个月,两组的HBV-DNA转阴率均高于治疗后1、3个月,且治疗组高于对照组(P＜0.05);治疗期间,治疗组患者死亡4例(13.33%),对照组患者死亡6例(20.00%),两组的死亡率比较无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。结论 恩替卡韦分散片是一种安全、有效的抗e抗原阳性CHB-ACLF药物,能有效抑制病毒复制和改善肝功能,促进患者预后转归。