祛风宣肺汤联合西药治疗咳嗽变异性哮喘(风邪犯肺)随机平行对照研究

[目的]观察祛风宣肺汤联合西药治疗咳嗽变异性哮喘(风邪犯肺)疗效。[方法]使用随机平行对照方法,将104例门诊患者按随机数字表法随机分为两组。对照组52例沙美特罗替卡松粉吸入剂,1吸/次,2次/d;多索茶碱,400mg/次,2次/d。治疗组52例祛风宣肺汤(麻黄、蜜枇杷叶、炒紫苏子各15g,蝉蜕、前胡、荆芥、炒牛蒡子、浙贝母、五味子、桔梗各10g,甘草8g,鱼腥草30g),水煎400mL,早晚温服,兼夹风寒者,加防风、紫菀、百部;兼夹风热者,加桑叶、菊花、薄荷、连翘;兼夹风燥者,加桑叶、杏仁、沙参;西药治疗同对照组。连续治疗3周为1疗程。观测临床表现、FEV_1、FEV_1%、用力肺活量(FVC)、最大呼气流量(PEF)、中医证候积分、不良反应。连续治疗2疗程(6周),判定疗效。[结果]治疗组痊愈26例,显效16例,有效7例,无效3例,总有效率94. 23%;对照组痊愈20例,显效13例,有效9例,无效10例,总有效率80. 77%;治疗组疗效优于对照组(P 0. 05)。FEV_1、FEV_1%、FVC、PEF、中医证候积分两组均有改善(P 0. 01),治疗组改善优于对照组(P 0. 05,P 0. 01)。[结论]祛风宣肺汤联合西药治疗咳嗽变异性哮喘(风邪犯肺),疗效满意,无严重不良反应,值得推广。     

丹参多酚酸盐治疗冠脉介入围手术期PCI相关心肌损伤的单中心、随机对照试验

目的采用随机、平行对照、前瞻性临床研究方法,探讨冠状动脉介入围手术期应用注射用丹参多酚酸盐对PCI相关心肌损伤的作用。方法选取128例2016年10月—2017年6月于复旦大学附属华山医院心内科拟行择期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)非ST段抬高型急性冠脉综合征(NSTE-ACS)住院患者,随机分为药物组和对照组,药物组60例,术前静脉滴注丹参多酚酸盐200 mg+生理盐水100 mL,滴速60 mL/h,之后第24、48 h继续静脉滴注(剂量和滴速同前)丹参多酚酸盐;对照组68例,等量、等速静脉滴注生理盐水。分别于术前和术后8、24、48 h检测肌钙蛋白T(cTnT)、肌酸激酶同工酶MB(CK-MB)、N端前脑钠肽(NT-pro-BNP)和超敏C-反应蛋白(hs-CRP)水平,记录峰值。将心肌损伤分为1级和2级,其中1级包括正常或轻度心肌损伤,术后cTNT正常或升高不足5倍99%参考值上限(URL);2级包括重度心肌损伤,术后cTNT升高超过5倍99%URL。采用多因素Logistic回归进行疗效分析。以心肌损伤1级为有效赋值,2级为无效赋值,建立3个多因素Logistic回归模型。模型1变量仅包括分组;模型2变量包括分组、糖尿病、高血压病、体重指数;模型3变量包括分组变量、糖尿病、高血压病、体重指数、植入支架数量、主血管病变支数。结果两组cTnT、CK-MB、NT-pro-BNP和hs-CRP峰值比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。与对照组比较,药物组1级心肌损伤患者比例升高(P=0.035)。模型1、2、3分组变量OR值(95%CI)分别为0.367(0.141,0.953), 0.318(0.115,0.874), 0.337(0.114,0.990),药物组有效率更高(P=0.040,0.026,0.048)。结论围手术期应用丹参多酚酸盐,可以改善NSTE-ACS患者PCI相关心肌损伤的程度,保护心肌。     

经鼻导管高流量吸氧与经鼻气道正压通气在重症毛细支气管炎呼吸支持中的应用价值比较

目的：比较经鼻导管高流量吸氧（HFNC）与经鼻气道正压通气（nCPAP）在重症毛细支气管炎呼吸支持中的应用价值，为临床治疗方案的选择提供参考。方法：选取2016年12月至2018年12月我院儿科收治的重症毛细支气管炎患儿90例，采用随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组各45例。两组患儿入院后均给予常规综合治疗以保证呼吸道通畅，在此基础上观察组采用HFNC治疗，对照组采用nCPAP治疗，比较两组患儿治疗前和治疗24 h后呼吸频率、经皮血氧饱和度（TcSO2）、呼吸窘迫评分体系（CSS）评分、动脉血氧分压（PaO2）等呼吸相关指标及治疗前后临床症状体征改善情况。结果：两组患儿治疗24 h后呼吸频率、CSS评分均降低，且观察组降低程度更大，TcSO2、PaO2于治疗24 h后升高，观察组升高幅度较对照组明显；治疗后两组患儿咳嗽及肺部湿啰音、肺部炎症情况均改善，观察组症状体征消失时间早于对照组，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论：重症毛细支气管炎患儿采用HFNC治疗可明显改善通气功能和临床症状，治疗效果优于nCPAP治疗，可扩大样本量进一步观察。     

经鼻高流量氧气湿化治疗老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重合并呼吸衰竭的可行性研究

ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility of transnasal heated humidified high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) with respiratory failure in elderly patients. MethodsA total of 176 elderly patients with AECOPD complicated with respiratory failure who were hospitalized at Peking University Shougang Hospital from December 2016 to January 2022 were enrolled, including 82 patients in an HFNC group and 94 patients in an NPPV group. After treatment, pulse oxygen saturation (SPO₂), arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO₂), oxygenation index (OI), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), comfort score, discharge rate, rate of endotracheal intubation, rate of transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), and mortality were compared between the two groups. The independent sample t-test was used for comparison between the two groups. Statistical data are expressed in percentage or number of cases and the χ² test was used for their comparisons. ResultsThe SPO₂ values at 30 min, 1 h, and 6 h were significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the NPPV group (t=-2.049,-2.618, and -3.314, P=0.043, 0.010, and 0.001, respectively). SPO₂ before discharge was significantly lower than that of the NPPV group (t=2.162, P=0.033), but OI at each time point and before discharge had no statistical significance (P＞0.05). MAP at 6 h was significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the NPPV group (t=-2.209, P=0.029), but within the normal range. HRs at 2 h and 3 h in the HFNC group were significantly higher than those of the NPPV group (t=-2.199 and -2.336, P=0.030 and 0.021, respectively). There were no significant differences in RR, HR, or MAP between the two groups at other time points and before discharge (P＞0.05). There was no significant difference in PaCO2 between the two groups (P＞0.05). Comfort score in the HFNC group was significantly higher than that of the NPPV group (t=-46.807, P＜0.001). There were no significant differences in discharge rate, ICU transfer rate, endotracheal intubation rate, and mortality between the two groups (P＞0.05). ConclusionHFNC is as effective as NPPV in treating elderly patients with AECOPD complicated with type Ⅰ or mild type Ⅱ respiratory failure, and HFNC is more comfortable than NPPV.