阿德福韦酯治疗拉米夫定耐药的慢性乙型肝炎的疗效观察

目的 观察阿德福韦酯（ADV）治疗拉米夫定（LAM）耐药的慢性乙型肝炎的临床疗效和安全性。方法 随机将81例拉米夫定耐药的HBeAg阳性慢性乙型肝炎患者分为ADV治疗组41例,以ADV联合LAM治疗12周,停用LAM再继续应用ADV治疗36周和LAM治疗组40例,继续应用LAM。结果 ADV治疗组患者在治疗24周和48周时HBV DNA水平下降明显优于LAM组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;ADV组治疗24周和48周时,血清HBeAg阴转率分别为31．7％和34．1％,血清HBeAg／抗-HBe转换率为24．4％和22．0％,丙氨酸氨基转移酶复常率为56．1％和68．3％,均显著优于LAM组（P〈0．05）。治疗中无不良反应发生。结论 ADV能有效安全地治疗LAM耐药性慢性乙型肝炎患者。     

乙型肝炎肝硬化失代偿期初始拉米夫定和阿德福韦酯联合抗病毒治疗的疗效观察

目的研究拉米夫定（LAM）初始联合阿德福韦酯（ADV）治疗乙型肝炎肝硬化失代偿期患者的疗效与安全性。方法30例HBeAg阳性乙型肝炎肝硬化失代偿期患者,分为LAM初始联合ADV治疗组和变异后联合组,疗程均为48周。结果初始联合组与变异后联合组患者ALT与TBil在治疗4、12、24与48周均较基线明显好转（P〈0．05）,治疗4、12周后,两组均无HBVDNA转阴的患者,治疗24周后,分别有4例（40％）初始联合组与4例（20％）变异后联合组患者HBVDNA转阴,但差异无统计学意义。治疗48周后,初始联合组与变异后联合组HBVDNA转阴率分别为90％（9／10）与40％（8／20）,HBeAg／抗-HBe血清转换率分别为60％（6／10）与20％（4／20）,两组间差异均具有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。初始联合组患者Child—Pugh评分在48周时,优于变异后联合组（P〈0．05）。结论ADV初始联合LAM治疗在改善乙型肝炎肝硬化失代偿期患者临床状况及抗病毒方面均明显优于变异后联合治疗。     

替诺福韦挽救治疗耐药复发的慢性乙型肝炎患者48周疗效初探

目的观察替诺福韦（TDF）单药或联合恩替卡韦（ETV）挽救治疗耐药复发的慢性乙型肝炎患者的疗效及安全性。方法回顾性分析11例耐药复发的慢性乙型肝炎患者的挽救治疗,其中6例患者单用TDF,5例患者采用TDF联合ETV。采用时间分辨免疫荧光法检测血清乙型肝炎病毒标志物,采用脱氧核糖核酸测序法检测与耐药相关的HBV P区169、173、180、181、184、202、204、233、236、250位耐药变异,采用PCR-荧光探针法检测血清HBV DNA载量,采用苦味酸法检测血清肌酐（Cr）水平。应用Kaplan-Meier分析血清HBV DNA累积不可检出率。结果挽救治疗前,1例患者检测到ADV基因型耐药,7例患者检测到LAM/ETV基因型耐药,3例患者检测到LAM/ETV/ADA基因型耐药;HBV DNA基线水平为（4.82±1.29） lg IU/ml,挽救治疗第4周降至（3.57±0.55） lg IU/ml,第12周降至（2.91±0.37） lg IU/ml,随访至第48周,仅1例患者可检测出HBV DNA。挽救治疗4、12、24和36周,血清HBV DNA累积不可检出率分别为36.4%（4/11）、63.6%（7/11）、81.8%（9/11）和90.9%（10/11）;随访结束时,血清ALT水平由（64.36±34.55） U/L降至（37.7±24.49） U/L;治疗期间未发生肾功能异常或其他不良事件。结论TDF单药或联合ETV挽救治疗耐药复发的慢性乙型肝炎患者仍能较快速地抑制病毒复制,具有良好的疗效和安全性。     

LA M、ETV抗病毒治疗对伴活动性肝硬化肝癌患者术后的影响

目的：探讨LAM、ETV抗病毒治疗对伴活动性肝硬化肝癌患者术后的影响。方法2011年至2013年我院收治的48例接受手术治疗的伴活动性肝硬化肝癌患者分为观察组和对照组,对照组给予单纯手术治疗,观察组采用手术治疗联合LAM、ETV抗病毒治疗。结果观察组患者的并发症发生率为16．7％（4/24）,比对照组62．5％（15/24）明显降低（P＜0．05）;治疗后48、96周观察组患者的ALT、AST、TBil、Alb、Child-Pugh 评分均较治疗前显著下降（P＜0．05）;治疗前后观察组患者各项生化指标和病毒学指标的改善程度比对照组大（P＜0．05）;观察组患者的生存时间明显比对照组显著增高,治疗后48、96周累计生存率均比对照组明显增高（P＜0．05）。结论 LAM、ETV 抗病毒对治疗伴活动性肝硬化肝癌的患者术后效果良好。     

阿德福韦酯对拉米夫定耐药的慢性乙型肝炎患者的疗效观察

目的观察阿德福韦酯（ADV）治疗拉米夫定（LAM）耐药的慢性乙型肝炎的疗效及ADV的耐药情况。方法152例拉米夫定耐药（也称YMDD变异）的慢性乙型肝炎患者分为治疗1组和治疗2组各76例。治疗1组停用LAM,单用ADV10mg/d口服。治疗2组继续服用LAM100mg/d,加用ADV10mg/d联合服用。通过测定HBVDNA、ALT、HBeAg水平,比较治疗12周、24周、48周、96周时的HBVDNA转阴（应答）率、ALT复常率及HBeAg阴转率。结果治疗12周时2组的HBVDNA阴转率、ALT复常均明显高于1组（P〈0.05）。24周时、48周时两组大部分HBVDNA能阴转,ALT能复常;两组无统计学差别（P〉0.05）;96周时1组有12例出现HBVDNA又转阳性,ALT异常,即出现了ADV耐药。2组疗效稳定,没出现ADV耐药。96周时两组HBeAg阴转率无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论ADV与LAM联合治疗LAM耐药的慢性乙型肝炎比单用ADV治疗能更早显效,且能降低ADV耐药的发生。     

阿德福韦酯联合拉米夫定治疗YMDD变异的慢性乙型肝炎疗效相关因素分析

目的研究分析影响阿德福韦（ADV）联合拉米夫定（LAM）治疗YMDD变异的慢性乙型肝炎疗效的相关因素。方法应用ADV联合LAM治疗71例YMDD变异的患者48周,采用Logistic回归分析影响疗效的相关因素。结果治疗48周时,HBVDNA转阴率为78．9％（56／71）,ALT复常率为80．3％（57／71）,HBeAg阳性患者HBeAg转阴或血清转换率为26．7％（12／45）;治疗24周和48周HBVDNA转阴、48周HBeAg转阴或血清转换和48周ALT复常者较相应时间点未转阴者的基线HBVDNA水平低（P〈0．05）;Logistic回归分析结果显示,基线HBVDNA低水平、24周HBVDNA转阴、12周YMDD变异转阴是48周获得较好疗效的相关因素。结论采用ADV联合LAM治疗YMDD变异的慢性乙型肝炎患者,其基线HBVDNA低水平、24周HBVDNA转阴、12周YMDD变异转阴是48周疗效较好的预测因素,发生病毒学突破而无生化学突破的患者早期联合治疗可获得更佳的疗效。     

核苷类似物治疗慢性乙型肝炎病毒血清学应答时间的探讨

目的：观察核苷类似物治疗慢性乙型肝炎病毒学及血清学的变化,探讨核苷类似物停用的时间及其安全性。方法95例慢性乙型肝炎患者,口服核苷类似物6年,出现 HBV DNA反弹的患者,根据测耐药位点,换用或联合核苷类似物,定期检查生化学指标、乙肝两对半定量、HBV DNA定量变化。结果6年中拉米夫定（LAM）、阿德福韦酯（ADV）、恩替卡韦（ETV）、替比夫定（TBV）、LAM＋ADV和ETV＋ADV组的 HBV DNA阴转时间分别为（9．3±2．7）、（12．7±2．9）、（4．5±2．1）、（8．9±2．6）、（4．8±1．9）、（3．8±0．9）月,ADV 组时间最长,低于其他组,差异具有统计学意义（P＜0．05）;随着 HBeAg载量的增高,HBeAg阴转时间和血清转换时间延长（P＜0．05）。结论对高病毒载量的慢性乙型肝炎患者核苷类似物使用应在6年以上,此类患者治疗达标后应适当延长疗程,巩固疗效。     

恩替卡韦治疗拉米夫定失效慢性乙型肝炎一年的疗效

目的评价恩替卡韦（ETV）对拉米夫定（LVD）失效的慢性乙型肝炎（CHB）患者治疗1年的疗效和安全性。方法选择LVD治疗失效的CHB患者145例，按4：1比例随机分为ETV组（1．0mg／d）116例和安慰剂组29例，治疗12周后，所有患者进入36周的开放用药阶段（ETV1．0mg／d）。观察血清HBVDNA水平、乙型肝炎e抗原（HBeAg）、肝生化功能的变化和不良事件的发生率。结果经12周的治疗，ETV组患者血清HBVDNA平均下降4．30log10拷贝／ml（聚合酶链反应法），安慰剂组下降0．15log10拷贝／ml（P＜0．01）。第12周时，在基线丙氨酸转氨酶（ALT）异常的患者中，ETV组的ALT复常率明显高于安慰剂组（分别为68％与6％，P＜0．01）。两组间不良事件的总发生率相当（33％与28％）。经48周的治疗，服用ETV48周患者HBVDNA的下降幅度为5．08log10拷贝／ml；服用ETV36周患者HBVDNA的下降幅度为4．86log10拷贝／ml；在治疗前ALT异常的患者中，上述两组ALT的复常率分别是85％和90％。治疗结束时，在基线HBeAg阳性的患者中，有6．2％（8／129）出现血清学转换。在治疗期间，未发生与耐药相关的变异。每天服用ETV1．0mg，持续48周的安全性和耐受性良好。结论ETV（1．0mg／d）治疗LVD失效的CHB患者具有显著的抗病毒和临床疗效。     

恩替卡韦抗乙型肝炎病毒应答不佳患者挽救方案的疗效比较

目的比较对ETV应答不佳的乙型肝炎患者挽救方案的疗效。方法选取我院2011年10月至2016年10月收治的对ETV应答不佳的乙型肝炎患者96例,随机分为ETV+ADV组、TDF组和ETV(1mg)组,每组各32例。ETV+ADV组患者口服ETV和ADV治疗,TDF组患者口服TDF治疗,ETV(1mg)组患者口服1mg ETV治疗,比较3组患者治疗前和治疗24周、48周后血清HBV DNA、ALT水平及HBeAg转阴率。结果与治疗前相比,3组患者治疗24、48周后HBV DNA、ALT均显著降低(P0.05),HBeAg阴转率均明显升高(P0.05)。与同组治疗24周后相比,3组患者治疗48周后HBV DNA、ALT均明显降低(P0.05),HBeAg转阴率均明显升高(P0.05)。ETV+ADV组、TDF组患者治疗24周、48周后HBV DNA、ALT明显低于ETV(1mg)组(P0.05),HBeAg阴转率明显高于ETV(1mg)组(P0.05),而ETV+ADV组、TDF组患者HBV DNA、ALT及HBeAg阴转率差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论对于ETV应答不佳的乙型肝炎患者,ETV联合ADV以及TDF替换ETV的挽救方案优于ETV(1mg)方案,值得临床推广。     

恩替卡韦与阿德福韦酯联合拉米夫定治疗HBeAg阳性慢性乙型肝炎的效果分析

目的比较抗乙型肝炎病毒药物恩替卡韦(ETV)与阿德福韦酯(ADV)联合拉米夫定(LAM)对治疗HBeAg阳性慢性乙型肝炎患者的疗效与安全性。 方法选择济南军区总医院2012年7月至2015年7月HBeAg阳性慢性乙型肝炎患者110例,随机分为恩ETV组50例,ADV＋LAM组60例,随访观察治疗48、96周后HBV-DNA转阴率,HBeAg血清学转换率,丙氨酸转氨酶(ALT)复常率及不良事件发生率。 结果治疗HBeAg阳性的慢性乙型肝炎结果显示,2组患者进行治疗48和96周后,在HBV-DNA转阴率(ETV比ADV＋LAM：48周20比15;96周35比45)及ALT复常方面(ETV比ADV＋LAM：48周40比44;96周48比56)均有效,但无明显差异(P>0.05);在HBeAg转阴率方面在随访前48周时,二者未见明显差异,但随着口服时间延长,ETV组转阴率明显高于ADV＋LAM组(ETV比ADV＋LAM：48周10比8;96周18比9)。 结论恩替卡韦与阿德福韦酯联合拉米夫定在治疗HBeAg阳性的慢性乙型肝炎患者中,随访时间越长恩替卡韦HBeAg转阴作用越显著,药物的安全性较高。     

Satisfaction with ambulatory care of persons with AIDS

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relation of patient characteristics and site of care to the perception of ambulatory care quality by persons with AIDS (PWAs). DESIGN: Patient surveys and medical record review were used to determine PWAs’ perceptions of their ambulatory care, self-perceived health status, primary care relationships, sociodemographic characteristics, and severity of illness. SETTING: A public-hospital HIV clinic, an academic group practice, and a staff-model health maintenance organization (HMO) that together care for 20% of all Massachusetts PWAs. PATIENTS: All active patients as of February 12, 1990, and all new AIDS patients at each of the three sites during the subsequent 13 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN BESULTS: The primary outcome measure was a six-item scale of patient-rated quality of care (PRQC), a newly developed measure that combined patients’ ratings of their physician care, nursing care, involvement in medical decisions, and overall quality of care. Multiple logistic regression was carried out with low PRQC (lowest quart He) as the dependent variable, to identify correlates of patient perceptions of poor quality. Patients who had a primary nurse were significantly less likely to have low PRQC scores (OR=0.50, 95% CI=0.26 to 0.97). Black patients and patients who used injection drugs were significantly more likely to rate their care in the lowest quartile (OR=2.22, 95% CI=1.04 to 4.78; and OR=2.43, 95% CI=1.13 to 5.23, respectively), as were those who had lower self-perceived health status, after controlling for confounders; no association was found by site or severity. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that primary nursing may be an important determinant of how PWAs rate the quality of their ambulatory care. Furthermore, PWAs who are black or who are injection drug users are less satisfied than are others with the quality of their ambulatory AIDS care. Presented in part at the annual meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, April 30, 1993, Arlington, Virginia. Supported by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, grant number HS06239.     

分析老年糖尿病患者应用甘精胰岛素联合阿卡波糖治疗的效果

目的探讨甘精胰岛素联合阿卡波糖在老年糖尿病患者中的临床疗效。方法选取该院2018年7月—2019年7月收治的113例老年糖尿病患者作为研究对象,经随机数字表法,划分A组(n=56,阿卡波糖)和B组(n=57,甘精胰岛素+阿卡波糖),比较两组临床疗效、血糖指标。结果B组患者临床治疗总有效率显著高于A组;经治疗,B组患者空腹血糖(FBG)、餐后2 h血糖(2 hPG)、糖化血红蛋白(HbAlc)水平明显低于A组。两组之间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论在老年糖尿病患者中应用甘精胰岛素+阿卡波糖,临床疗效显著,使患者的空腹血糖、餐后2 h血糖、糖化血红蛋白等指标得到了明显改善,安全性强。     

Treatment of patients with Eisenmenger's syndrome with Bosentan

We treated prospectively 14 patients with Eisenmenger's syndrome, with a mean age of 10 years, ranging from 3 to 18 years. Treatment continued for 12 months, and demonstrated a lasting symptomatic improvement, but no improvement in terms of mean saturation of oxygen over 24 hours. Exercise capacity, as judged by peak uptake of oxygen, worsened in the six patients able to perform a treadmill test. The symptomatic benefit from dual blockage of endothelin receptors in these patients may be due to mechanisms other than selective pulmonary vasodilatation alone.     

小剂量垂体后叶素合并硝酸甘油治疗咯血

目的评价小剂量垂体后叶素联合硝酸甘油治疗咯血的疗效及不良反应。方法将50例咯血患者随机分为两组,治疗组在常规治疗基础上（n=26）应用小剂量垂体后叶素联合硝酸甘油;对照组（n=24）在常规治疗基础上仅应用小剂量垂体后叶素。分析其疗效及不良反应。结果48小时后治疗组有效率96.15％（25／26）,对照组有效率58.33％（14／24）,差异有统计学意义（P=0.012）;治疗组对血压影响小,无统计学意义（P〉0.05）,对照组能引起血压升高的副作用（P〈0.05）;治疗组出现头晕头痛、胸闷、心悸、腹痛、腹泻、恶心呕吐、出汗、面色苍白等不良反应比对照组少,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论小剂量垂体后叶素联合硝酸甘油治疗中量咯血比垂体后叶素单药治疗中量咯血疗效明显提高,且能减少垂体后叶素不良反应。     

Complications associated with the treatment of haemophiliacs with inhibitors

To examine the safety profile of products used to treat inhibitor patients unresponsive to factor VIII, a review of published clinical experience was performed. The products evaluated were activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCCs), such as AUTOPLEX® T, porcine factor VIII and recombinant activated factor VII (rVIIa). Safety characteristics included potential for transmission of infectious agents, anamnesis, thrombogenicity, thrombocytopenia and allergic reactions. While viral transmission has been virtually eliminated, the risk is theoretically higher with plasma-derived products such as aPCC and porcine factor VIII than with rVIIa, although contamination of cultured cells is a concern. Anamnesis occurs with aPCCs and porcine factor VIII, and may induce resistance to further therapy with porcine factor VIII. Thrombosis and disseminated intravascular coagulation are very infrequently reported in patients exposed to aPCCs and rVIIa, and never with porcine factor VIII. The latter is occasionally associated with thrombocytopenia, but this uncommonly limits treatment with this agent. Lastly, allergic reactions occur with about equal frequency with all products, but anaphylaxis is mainly a concern after administration of porcine factor VIII. In conclusion, products currently available are reasonably safe. Considerations such as efficacy, availability, ease of administration and cost must also be considered in making treatment choices.     

Evaluation of atrial vulnerability with transoesophageal stimulation in patients with atrioventricular junctional: Comparison with patients with ventricular pre-excitation and with normal subjects

The aim of our work was to evaluate the inducibility of atrialfibrillation in a group of patients with atrioventricular junctionalreentrant tachycardia and to compare it with that of patientswith a Kent-type ventricular pre-excitation (Wolff-Parkinson-Whitesyndrome) and a control group. One hundred and twenty-five subjects were separated into groups.Group 1 comprised 49 Wolff-Parkinson-White patients, with amean age of 26.4, range 10.66 years; group 2, 51 patients withatrioventricular junctional reentrant tachycardia inducibleby transoesophageal atrial stimulation andlor clinically documented,with a mean age of 43.4, range 16–78 years; group 3, 25control subjects with a mean age of2.64, range 13–76 years. Each subject underwent atrial transoesophageal stimulation withthe following protocol: programmed atrial stimulation with 1and 2 stimuli during atrial pacing of 100. min^–1 and 150.min^–1; atrial stimulation for 10 s at a rate of 200–300–400–500–600.min^–1 with intervals of 10 s between stimulations, fivesuccessive ‘ramp-up’ atrial stimulations for 9 swith the rate increasing from 100 to 800. min^–1 with intervalsof 10 s between stimulations. The end point was the completionof the protocol or induction of sustained atrial fibrillation(>1 min). The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. Our resultsshowed that in group 1 atrial fibrillation was induced in 27149patients (55.1%); this was sustained in 13149 (26.5%) and non-sustainedin 14149 (28.5%); in group 2, atrial fibrillation was inducedin 22151 patients (43.0%); it was sustained in 7151 (13.7%)and non-sustained in 15151 (29.4%); in group 3, sustained atrialfibrillation was not induced in any subject and in only onesubject was a non-sustained atrial fibrillation (4 s) induced. The chi-square test showed that group 2 vs group 1 were non-significant,while group 2 vs group 3 and group 1 vs group 3 were significant(P<0.003 and P<0.0007, respectively). Therefore group 2 patients showed a greater atrial vulnerabilityin comparison to the control subjects and a similar vulnerabilityto group 1 patients. It is possible that the greater atrialvulnerability in the patients of group 2 was due to the doublenodal pathway.