咪唑斯汀对花生四烯酸诱导的鼠爪水肿的影响

目的 探讨咪唑斯汀抗炎活性的产生机制。方法 大鼠鼠爪皮下注射0.1 mL的花生四烯酸(体积分数为0.003)诱导鼠爪水肿炎性动物模型。注射前灌胃分别给予咪唑斯汀、氯雷他定、西替利嗪(0.3 mg/kg),用千分尺测量肿胀足爪厚度,比较不同抗组胺药对鼠爪肿胀抑制程度的高低。分别给予大鼠5-脂氧合酶的直接抑制剂齐留通(3 mg/kg)和咪唑斯汀(0.3 mg/kg),比较2种药物对鼠爪肿胀抑制程度的高低。结果 咪唑斯汀显著抑制花生四烯酸诱导的鼠爪水肿,氯雷他定、西替利嗪对鼠爪水肿无抑制作用(P<0.01);齐留通显著抑制鼠爪水肿(P<0.01),对鼠爪水肿的抑制率与咪唑斯汀比较差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论 咪唑斯汀可能通过抑制5-脂氧合酶活性的途径发挥其抗炎活性。     

3种抗组胺药治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹的临床研究

目的:评价第2代抗组胺药咪唑斯汀、西替利嗪、氯雷他定治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹的疗效和安全性。方法:采用随机开放平行对照的方法,对96例慢性特发性荨麻疹患者进行随机分组,分别予以咪唑斯汀10mg、西替利嗪10mg、氯雷他定10mg,均每日1次口服,观察治疗第14天、第28天的临床疗效及停药1周后的复发率。结果:三者治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹第14天和第28天的有效率分别为:咪唑斯汀组90.0%和96.7%,西替利嗪组85.3%和94.2%,氯雷他定组90.6%和93.8%,三者之间差异无显著性(P>0.05)。停药1周后的复发率,咪唑斯汀组为40.0%,西替利嗪组为35.3%,氯雷他定组为28.1%。整个试验过程中均无明显严重不良反应出现。结论:咪唑斯汀、西替利嗪和氯雷他定治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹临床疗效好,安全性高,在改善临床症状及控制复发方面各有所长。     

荨麻疹

20 0 138 71　咪唑斯汀治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹临床研究/吴国勤 (复旦大学附属中山医院皮肤科 )…∥临床皮肤科杂志 .- 2 0 0 1,30 (3) .- 181～ 183为评价咪唑斯汀治疗慢性荨麻疹的疗效和安全性 ,采用随机开放平行对照的方法 ,将 6 0例慢性荨麻疹患者分成两组 ,分别接受咪唑斯汀或氯雷他定治疗 ,疗程 2 8天。结果表明咪唑斯汀能有效缓解患者的瘙痒症状 ,减少风团数目与直径 ,治疗有效率为 93.10 % ;氯雷他定为 87.1% ,经检验差别无显著性 (P>0 .0 5 )。表 2参 6　 (余春艳 )2 0 0 13872　斯特林治疗慢性荨麻疹疗效观察 /林益钱(温州市疾病预…     

咪唑斯汀治疗皮炎湿疹68例临床分析

目的评价咪唑斯汀治疗皮炎湿疹的临床疗效。方法118例皮炎湿疹患者随机分为两组,咪唑斯汀组68例口服咪唑斯汀10mg,氯雷他定组50例口服氯雷他定10mg,均1次/d。结果咪唑斯汀治疗急慢性湿疹和异位性皮炎3周有效率为90.7%,氯雷他定组为60.0%,两组差异有显著性(P<0.01);咪唑斯汀与氯雷他定对接触性皮炎的1周有效率均为100%,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论咪唑斯汀是治疗皮炎湿疹等过敏性疾病的理想药物。     

咪唑斯汀与地氯雷他定治疗慢性荨麻疹的随机单盲对照临床研究

目的:观察咪唑斯汀治疗慢性荨麻疹的疗效和安全性,并与地氯雷他定进行比较。方法:采用随机开放单盲对照方法,对78例慢性荨麻疹病例进行临床研究,治疗组给予口服咪唑斯汀10 mg,1天1次,持续14天,对照组给予口服地氯雷他定5 mg,1天1次,持续14天。结果:治疗组总有效率89.74%,对照组总有效率84.62%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组均未发现严重的药物不良反应。结论:咪唑斯汀治疗慢性荨麻疹安全有效,可作为治疗慢性荨麻疹的新选择。     

湿疹及皮炎

20053103咪唑斯汀治疗皮炎湿疹68例临床分析/段民录(西安电力中心医院皮肤科)∥中国皮肤性病学杂志.-2005,19(6).-380~381随机分为两组,咪唑斯汀组68例口服咪唑斯汀10mg,氯雷他定组50例口服氯雷他定10mg,均1次/d。咪唑斯汀治疗急慢性湿疹和异位性皮炎3周有效率为90.7%,氯雷他定为60.0%。两组差异有显著性(P<0.01),咪唑斯汀与氯雷他定对接触性皮炎的1周有效率均为100%,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。表2参2(余春艳)20053104易菲莎治疗皮炎湿疹130例/周英芹(江苏建湖县疾控中心),於如军∥皮肤病与性病.-2005,27(2).-24均外用易菲莎,早晚各1次,1周为1…     

特应性皮炎和湿疹患者血清金黄色葡萄球菌肠毒素B特异性抗体的检测及其意义

目的 探讨特应性皮炎(AD)和湿疹患者血清金黄色葡萄球菌肠毒素B(SEB)特异性抗体水平及其意义。方法 采用多中心、随机双盲、对照法,将118例AD和207例湿疹患者分为莫匹罗星治疗组和对照组,于治疗前和治疗28d取血清行间接酶联免疫吸附测定法测定抗SEB特异性IgG、IgM水平,采用链霉亲和素-生物素法检测抗SEBIgE水平。结果 治疗前,抗SEBIgE水平AD组显著高于正常人对照组(P=0.019)和湿疹组(P=0.048),湿疹组与正常人对照组之间差异无统计学意义(P=0.883);抗SEBIgM水平AD组(P=0.012)和湿疹组(P=0.000)均显著高于正常人对照组,AD组与湿疹组之间差异无统计学意义(P=0.088);抗SEBIgG水平各组间均差异无统计学意义(P=0.897)。临床症状评分与抗SEBIgE水平之间AD组(P=0.842)和湿疹组(P=0.134)均无显著相关性。治疗28d后,抗SEBIgM水平AD组显著下降(P=0.003),湿疹组亦显著下降(P=0.000),但治疗组与对照组间AD组(P=0.331)和湿疹组(P=0.815)差异均无统计学意义。结论 AD和湿疹患者血中抗SEBIgM、IgE升高,反映皮损处近期金黄色葡萄球菌定植并参与了皮肤变应性炎症性反应。     

尖锐湿疣患者外周血白细胞分泌肿瘤坏死因子的体外研究

目的 研究尖锐湿疣复发与个体肿瘤坏死因子(TNF-α)分泌能力之间的关系,探讨尖锐湿疣的复发遗传基础。方法 利用体外多次传代培养的B淋巴母细胞样细胞株(LCL)作为TNF产生细胞,采用生物活性检测法检测LCL在LPS刺激下分泌TNF的能力。结果 实验结果显示尖锐湿疣患者组(包括复发患者和未复发患者)LCL的TNF分泌能力与正常人对照组差异无显著性(30.14%±12.27%与34.06%±12.06%,P=0.1136);而尖锐湿疣复发组的TNF分泌能力明显低于尖锐湿疣未复发组(24.75%±7.51%与36.62%±10.96%,P=0.00016);与正常人对照组比较,尖锐湿疣复发组的TNF分泌能力明显低下(P=0.00054),尖锐湿疣未复发组则与正常人对照组差异无显著性(P=0.3517)。结论 在清除治疗后残留HPV病毒的过程中,TNF参与的细胞免疫机制可能发挥重要作用。     

地氯雷他定与咪唑斯汀治疗慢性荨麻疹的疗效和安全性比较

目的 :评价地氯雷他定与咪唑斯汀比较治疗慢性荨麻疹的临床疗效和安全性。方法 :采用随机对照临床试验 ,试验组每日口服地氯雷他定 5mg,疗程 1 4d;对照组每日口服咪唑斯汀 1 0mg,疗程 1 4d。结果 :共治疗 94例 ,试验组 49例 ,对照组 45例。患者主、客观症状观察项目平均积分于服药第 7、1 4天均有下降 ,但两组比较均无统计学意义。治疗后第 1 4天总有效率为试验组 85 7% ,对照组 82 2 % ,两组比较差异无显著性 (P >0 0 5 )。不良反应发生率试验组为 1 0 2 % ,对照组为 1 3 3 % ,两组比较差异无显著性 (P >0 0 5 )。两组用药前后血尿常规、肝肾功能、心电图均无有意义的变化。结论 :地氯雷他定和咪唑斯汀都是治疗慢性荨麻疹安全有效的药物     

地氯雷他定治疗慢性荨麻疹疗效观察

目的 :观察地氯雷他定治疗慢性荨麻疹的疗效和安全性。方法 :采取随机对照临床试验 ,试验组每日口服地氯雷他定 5mg,疗程 2周 ;对照组每日口服咪唑斯汀 1 0mg,疗程 2周。结果 :共治疗1 5 6例 ,试验组 81例 ,对照组 75例 ,试验组总有效率为 88 9% ,对照组为 86 6% ,两组总有效率比较差异无显著性 (P >0 0 5 ) ;不良反应发生率试验组为 1 0 9% ,对照组为 9 3 % ,两组比较差异无显著性 (P>0 0 5 )。结论 :地氯雷他定是一种治疗慢性荨麻疹较安全有效的药物。     

Efficacy and safety of mizolastine 10 mg in a placebo-controlled comparison with loratadine in chronic idiopathic urticaria: results of the MILOR Study.

BACKGROUND: Mizolastine is a novel histamine H1-antagonist registered in Europe for the management of allergic rhinitis and urticaria. OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of mizolastine with loratadine and placebo in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study was designed in which 247 patients with CIU were randomised after a 1-week placebo run-in period to 10 mg daily mizolastine (n = 88), 10 mg daily loratadine (n = 79), or placebo (n = 80) for a 4-week treatment period. RESULTS: Mizolastine and loratadine both relieved symptoms of CIU. After 2 weeks' treatment, the severity of pruritus (visual analogue score (VAS) assessed by patients) decreased significantly in both the mizolastine and loratadine groups compared with placebo (mizolastine: -36.7 mm, P = 0.0001; loratadine: -29.8, P = 0.0071; placebo: -16.3); this improvement with both active treatments was maintained throughout the treatment period, the difference being significant only for the mizolastine group (P = 0.0090). Both active treatments were also associated with reduced weekly episodes of urticaria compared with placebo, which was significant after 2 weeks' treatment (mizolastine: 7.9 episodes, P = 0.0061; loratadine: 8.3, P = 0.0221; placebo: 13.3). Angioedema was improved to a clinically significant extent with mizolastine, and loratadine compared with placebo in those patients who had this symptom before treatment. Overall tolerability of both treatments was similar to placebo, and there were no clinically relevant effects on cardiac repolarisation with either mizolastine or loratadine. CONCLUSION: Mizolastine (10 mg daily) is confirmed as an effective and well tolerated agent, comparable to loratadine and superior to placebo, for the management of CIU. Mizolastine acted as rapidly as loratadine in improving urticarial symptoms from the first day of treatment.     

Comparative therapeutic effect and safety of mizolastine and loratadine in chronic idiopathic urticaria. URTILOR study group

Mizolastine, a new second-generation H1 receptor antagonist with additional anti-allergic properties, was compared with loratadine in 61 patients suffering from severe chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). In this double-blind study, patients were randomly allocated to receive either mizolastine 10 mg (n = 26) or loratadine 10 mg (n = 35) once-daily for 28 days. Both compounds were well tolerated, safe and efficacious. The reduction in the number of episodes per week (5. 6+/-16.3 and 6.4+/-12.4 for mizolastine and loratadine, respectively) and the reduction in the symptom severity score, measured using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), were comparable (30.2 +/- 39.0 mm and 30.5 +/- 28.5 mm for mizolastine and loratadine, respectively). Mizolastine had a positive effect on angioedema (85% CI 95% [0.69-1.00]) of patients improved compared with 75% (CI 95% [0.59-0.91]) of the loratadine group and the differential reduction of the mean total duration of episodes in the mizolastine group was higher when compared with the loratadine group (from 13.7 +/- 33.5 hours on day 0 to 5.1 +/- 9.0 hours over the treatment period and from 8.2 +/- 8.8 hours on day 0 to 5.1 +/- 7.8 hours over the treatment period for mizolastine and loratadine, respectively). Prick test analysis demonstrated that both drugs caused a significant decrease of histamine-induced wheal and flare with no development of tolerance, with a significant superiority of mizolastine over loratadine for some histamine concentrations. Mizolastine and loratadine both proved very efficacious and safe. In addition mizolastine demonstrated a superiority in prick tests, beneficial effects on angioedema and seemed to provide a faster onset of action.     

咪唑斯汀治疗原发性获得性寒冷性荨麻疹临床疗效观察

目的：评价咪唑斯汀治疗原发性获得性寒冷性荨麻疹的疗效与安全性。方法：采用多中心、随机双盲、安慰剂平行对照的方法，将入选患者随机分为试验组和对照组，分别接受咪唑斯汀和安慰剂治疗，观察患者对冷刺激试验的风团反应和瘙痒程度，以及临床反应。结果：试验组患者冷刺激试验的风团反应、冷刺激试验复温20min时的瘙痒程度、遇冷空气或冷水后出现风团或瘙痒的程度与安慰剂组相比有统计学差异（P〈0．05）。结论：咪唑斯汀治疗原发性获得性寒冷性荨麻疹安全、有效。     

Safety and efficacy of desloratadine in chronic idiopathic urticaria in clinical practice: an observational study of 9246 patients

Background  Post-marketing surveillance studies (PMSS) of medications are often mandated by authorities, provide crucial insights for health services and are useful to define the clinical profiles of therapies. Desloratadine, a non-sedating, second-generation H₁-receptor antagonist, is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU).
Methods  A PMSS in CIU patients evaluated the tolerability and efficacy of desloratadine in clinical practice. At Visit 1 (baseline), demographic and CIU history were recorded and patients/physicians rated the severity of CIU symptoms, interference with sleep/daily activities and the general state of urticaria. Patients also noted the use and effectiveness of previous antihistamine therapy. At the end of treatment (Visit 2), CIU symptom severity and other disease criteria were re-assessed. Adverse events reported during or ≤ 30 days after treatment were collected.
Results  A total of 9246 patients with CIU participated (63% female). Itching, number of wheals and the size of the largest wheal decreased significantly from baseline with desloratadine therapy ( P <  0.0001). Improvements in CIU-impaired sleep and daily activities were reported by 67% and 71% of patients, respectively ( P <  0.0001). In patients that received previous therapy with cetirizine, loratadine or fexofenadine alone, patients rated the onset of efficacy of desloratadine as faster in 55.5%, 54.7% and 57.6% of cases, respectively. The incidence of adverse events was low (0.5% of patients) and no serious adverse events were reported.
Conclusions  This large PMSS confirms evidence from multiple placebo-controlled trials that desloratadine is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of CIU.

Conflicts of interest

None declared     

地洛他定和氯雷他定治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹多中心双盲对照临床试验

目的　观察地洛他定治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹效果及安全性。方法　采用多中心、双盲、双模拟阳性对照研究 ,随机分为试验组和对照组。地洛他定 5mg/次 ,氯雷他定 10mg/次 ,均 1次 /d ,连续服用 2 8天 ,分别于用药后第 1、2、4周随访 ,观察疗效和不良反应。结果　入组例数 2 17例 ,可评价疗效及安全性例数分别为 2 11例和 2 12例。试验组和对照组服药后第 1周疗效分别为 2 3 .81%和 3 2 .0 8% ,第 2周分别为 62 .86%和 5 9.43 % ,第 4周疗效分别为 88.78%和83 .0 2 %。两组不良反应发生率分别为 11.3 2 %和 13 .2 1% ,主要有口干、嗜睡、头痛等。结论　地洛他定治疗慢性特发性荨麻疹安全有效。     

慢性荨麻疹患者血清组胺释放活性检测

目的 检测慢性荨麻疹患者血清组胺释放活性,探讨慢性荨麻疹的发病机制.方法 通过体外分离人皮肤肥大细胞,进行肥大细胞组胺释放试验,测定组胺释放率.结果 62例慢性荨麻疹患者中,自体血清皮肤试验阳性者24例占38.71%.混合细胞悬液中肥大细胞的组胺自发释放率<5%.血清活化皮肤肥大细胞引起的组胺释放率从3.1%～79.5%(16.44%±14.26%),明显高于正常人对照组(P<0.01),其中27例组胺释放率>15%(43.55%);自体血清皮肤试验(+)组的组胺释放率及阳性率均明显高于自体血清皮肤试验(-)组(P<0.01).结论 部分慢性荨麻疹患者血清中存在组胺释放活性,可直接活化肥大细胞,释放组胺等血管活性介质,引起荨麻疹.     

Barbed polyglyconate vs monocryl suture in vesico-urethral anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

AIM: To compare outcomes using barbed polyglyconate(V-Loc 180) vs monofilament monocryl suture in forming vesico-urethral anastomosis(VUA) during robot assisted radical prostatectomy.METHODS: Review of prospectively collected robot assisted radical prostatectomy data between July 2011 and September 2012. VUA technique: VUA was performed using 2 cm × 15 cm 2/0 V-Loc 180 continuous sutures or 3/0 monofilament monocryl sutures. Anastomotic integrity was tested intra-operatively with a water leak test. All patients had a post-operative cystogram at day 7 to 10.RESULTS: There were 189 patients in the study with 113 in the V-Loc group and 76 in the monocryl group. Demographics were similar for both groups P 0.05). The median operative time for V-Loc group was 130 min and monocryl group was 145 min, which was statistically significant(P 0.001). The median blood loss for both groups was 200 m L with no significant difference(P = 0.260). The pathology results of the 2 groups were similar(P = 0.537). Four patients in the V-Loc group and two patients in the monocryl group had radiological urinary leak. This was not statistically significant(P = 1.00) and all patients improved with conservative management. The continence rates were comparable for both groups.CONCLUSION: V-Loc suture significantly reduced operative time facilitating ease of VUA formation. Overall functional outcome and urinary morbidity were not significantly different from the monofilament group.     

氯雷他定联合地氯雷他定治疗儿童慢性自发性荨麻疹的临床观察

目的：探讨氯雷他定联合地氯雷他定治疗儿童慢性自发性荨麻疹的临床疗效及安全性。方法177例儿童自发性慢性荨麻疹患儿分为3组。根据年龄,试验组每日晨服地氯雷他定,同时每晚睡前口服氯雷他定,连用28 d。对照1组每日晨服安慰剂（淀粉压片）半片,每晚睡前口服氯雷他定,连用28 d。对照2组每日晨服安慰剂半片,同时每晚睡前口服地氯雷他定,连用28 d。于用药后随访观察药物的可能不良反应及疗程结束时药物的疗效。结果试验组、对照1组及对照2组有效率分别为90.9%、71.4%和74.5%,试验组有效率优于对照组（χ2值分别为6.865、5.153,均P＜0.05）,3个组不良反应发生率分别为10.9%、8.9%、9.1%,3个组不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论氯雷他定联合地氯雷他定治疗儿童慢性自发性荨麻疹优于单用氯雷他定或单用地氯雷他定治疗,3个组不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义。     

Emedastine difumarate versus loratadine in chronic idiopathic urticaria: a randomized, double-blind, controlled European multicentre clinical trial

Emedastine difumarate (2 mg b.i.d.) was compared to loratadine (10 mg o.d.) in a randomized, double-blind, multicentre trial for 4 weeks in 192 patients with idiopathic chronic urticaria. After one week of treatment significant differences were recorded: body skin involvement diminished to 0-10% in 57.1% of emedastine patients vs. 38.2% of loratadine patients (p = 0.0019) and 83.3% had a total urticaria symptom score of 0-1 vs. 64.5% with loratadine (p = 0.0134). After 4 weeks of treatment the efficacy of the two drugs was similar in terms of mean change in total urticaria symptom score (- 5.57 +/- 3.15 with emedastine - 5.67 +/- 3.26 with loratadine), proportion of symptom-free patients (52.4% vs. 54.5%), intensity of erythema, number of hives, size of the largest hive, extent of skin area involved and overall assessment of urticaria symptoms.Twenty-three emedastine patients (23.9%) and 17 loratadine patients (17.7%) experienced an adverse event. Nineteen events in 15 emedastine patients and 9 in 9 loratadine patients were related to treatment (p = 0.0294). Only one event caused discontinuation in both treatment groups. The most common adverse event was sleepiness (7 patients with emedastine and 2 with loratadine).Emedastine is well tolerated, and as effective as loratadine in the short-term treatment of chronic idiopathic urticaria.