清肺承气汤辅助治疗重症肺炎痰热壅肺证临床分析

发布时间：2018-05-19 12:18

  本文选题：清肺承气汤 + 重症肺炎　； 参考：《中国实验方剂学杂志》2016年08期

【摘要】：目的:观察清肺承气汤辅助治疗重症肺炎痰热壅肺证的临床疗效以及对血清晚期糖基化终末产物受体(RAGE),肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)和白细胞介素-6(IL-6)水平的影响。方法:本组研究共96例,均为ICU病房收治重症肺炎患者,参照数字表法随机分为治疗组和对照组各48例;对照组采取常规治疗,在早期抗感染采取利奈唑胺注射液,静脉滴注治疗,1次/12 h,600 mg/次;治疗组在对照组治疗的基础上给予清肺承气汤内服,1剂/d,常规水煎煮2次。两组患者疗程均为2周。比较两组治疗前后中医主证积分、动脉血气变化以及急性生理和慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ);评价两组治疗后的临床效果;检测两组治疗前后血清RAGE,TNF-α和IL-6水平。结果:治疗组治疗后中医主证积分发热、咳嗽、痰壅和气促分均明显低于对照组(P0.01);治疗组总有效率为95.83%,对照组为79.17%,治疗组优于对照组(P0.05);治疗组治疗后二氧化碳分压(Pa CO2)和APACHEⅡ均明显低于对照组,而血氧饱和度(Sa O2)和血氧分压(Pa O2)明显高于对照组(P0.01);治疗后治疗组RAGE,TNF-α和IL-6水平均明显低于对照组,比较差异均有统计学意义(P0.01)。结论:在西医临床治疗的基础上,加用清肺承气汤辅助治疗重症肺炎痰热壅肺证可明显改善患者中医主证积分,APACHEⅡ评分以及动脉血气,提高临床治疗效果,降低血清RAGE,TNF-α和IL-6水平可能是其发挥治疗作用的机制之一。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the clinical efficacy of Qingfei Chengqi decoction in treating severe pneumonia with phlegm heat obstruction of lung syndrome and its effect on the levels of serum advanced glycation end product receptor (RAGEG), tumor necrosis factor- 伪 (TNF- 伪) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). Methods: 96 patients with severe pneumonia in ICU ward were randomly divided into treatment group (n = 48) and control group (n = 48). The treatment group was given Qingfei Chengqi decoction on the basis of the treatment of control group for 1 / 1 / d, and the routine water decoction was boiled twice on the basis of the treatment of the control group. The course of treatment was 2 weeks. The scores of main syndromes, arterial blood gas, acute physiology and chronic health were compared between the two groups before and after treatment. The clinical effects of the two groups were evaluated, and the serum levels of RAGEN TNF- 伪 and IL-6 were measured before and after treatment. Results: in the treatment group, the symptoms of fever and cough were accumulated after treatment. The scores of phlegm obstruction and shortness of breath were significantly lower than those of the control group (P 0.01), the total effective rate of the treatment group was 95.83 and the control group was 79.17, the treatment group was superior to the control group (P 0.05), the treatment group was significantly lower than the control group in terms of partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Paco _ 2) and APACHE 鈪，

本文编号：1910069