论文部分内容阅读
目的探索慢性前列腺炎(CP)和性病在病原方面的联系,评价综合疗法治疗性病后CP的疗法。方法治疗前对所有性病后CP患者的前列腺按摩液(EPS)进行相关病原微生物检测。78例患者随机分为3组,单用左氧氟沙星治疗(A组),采用左氧氟沙星、α1受体阻滞剂(高特灵)、微波治疗(B组),采用左氧氟沙星、中药、微波治疗(C组)。疗程均为1个月。通过治疗前后EPS白细胞计数及CP症状积分指数(CPSI)评分结果比较3种疗法治疗性病后CP的疗效。结果78例患者EPS中检出性病相关病原者9例。3组患者治疗后EPS白细胞计数和CPSI评分均较治疗前下降(P<0.01),其中B、C两组下降较A组显著(P<0.01),B、C两组间差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论性病后CP和性病之间在病原学上无严格的因果关系,综合疗法治疗性病后CP较单一疗法优越。
Objective To explore the relationship between chronic prostatitis (CP) and sexually transmitted diseases in pathogenicity and to evaluate the treatment of CP after sexually transmitted diseases (STD). Methods Before treatment, all patients with CP after sexually transmitted diseases were tested for prostate pathogenic microorganism (EPS). 78 patients were randomly divided into 3 groups, treated with levofloxacin alone (group A), with levofloxacin, α1 receptor blocker (Gatling), microwave treatment (group B), levofloxacin, Chinese medicine, microwave treatment ). Treatment are 1 month. The effects of three treatments on CP after treatment of sexually transmitted diseases were compared by the results of EPS white blood cell count and CP Symptom Index (CPSI) score before and after treatment. Results Ninety-seven cases of STD-related pathogens were detected in EPS of 78 patients. The white blood cell count and CPSI score of the three groups after treatment were lower than those before treatment (P <0.01), and the decrease in group B and C was more significant than that in group A (P <0.01), but there was no significant difference between group B and C P> 0.05). Conclusions There is no etiological relationship between CP and STD after STD. CP is superior to single therapy after STD.