多索茶碱与氨茶碱治疗支气管哮喘临床疗效的对比探讨

目的：对多索茶碱与氨茶碱治疗支气管哮喘临床疗效进行观察与探讨。方法随机选取2013年7月—2015年7月期间在该院接受治疗的100例支气管哮喘患者进行临床的相关研究,按照随机方式分为两组,每组50例,对对照组患者进行氨茶碱治疗,对研究组患者进行多索茶碱治疗,分析两组支气管哮喘患者的效果。结果研究组患者的治疗总有效率(98.00%)与对照组患者(78.00%)相比,组间差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05),研究组患者治疗后的FEV1、FEV1/FVC、PEF分别为(2.14±0.21) L、(66.49±3.02)%、(6.23±0.17) L/s,与对照组患者相比,组间差异有统计学意义,研究组患者的不良反应总发生率(4.00%)与对照组患者(18.00%)相比,组间差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。结论与使用氨茶碱治疗相比,使用多索茶碱治疗支气管哮喘患者的临床疗效更佳。

Comparison of the Clinical Efficacy Between Doxofylline and Aminophylline in the Treatment of Bronchial Asthma

Objective To observe and investigate the clinical efficacy of Doxofylline and Aminophylline in the treatment of bronchial asthma. Methods A clinical study was conducted on 100 cases with bronchial asthma treated in our hospital from July 2013 to July 2015. The patients were randomly divided into two groups, the control group and the study group with 50 cases in each. Patients in the control group were treated by Aminophylline, and those in the study group were treated by Doxofylline. And the treatment effect of the two groups was analyzed. Results There was statistically significant difference in the overall response rate between the study group and the control group (98.00% vs 78.00%) (P<0.05). After treatment, the FEV1, FEV1/FVC, PEF, respectively was (2.14±0.21) L, (66.49±3.02)% and (6.23±0.17) L/s in the study group, com-pared with that in the control group, respectively, the differences in terms of these three indexes between the two groups were statistically significant. The difference in the overall incidence of complications between the study group and the con-trol group was statistically significant (4.00% vs 18.00%) (P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with Aminophylline, Doxofylline has better clinical curative effect on patients with bronchial asthma.