论文部分内容阅读
目的旨在比较消化性溃疡出血内镜治疗成功后口服与静脉质子泵抑制剂(PPI)预防再出血的疗效方法连续性入选2010年8月-2013年5月就诊于梅县人民医院的100例高出血风险的消化性溃疡患者,这些患者经内镜治疗成功后被随机分为口服兰索拉唑组和静脉注射埃索美拉唑组。研究主要终点为14 d内再出血的发生率。次要终点为1月内的住院时间、输血量、外科介入及死亡率。结果静脉注射组再出血率为4%(2/50),口服组为4%(2/50)。两组患者在住院时间、输血量、外科介入及死亡率上差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。口服兰索拉唑组患者的平均住院时间短于静脉注射埃索美拉唑组(P<0.01)。结论口服质子泵抑制剂患者住院时间更短。没有证据证明口服和静脉注射PPI的临床疗效有不同。然而,此项研究并没有足够证据证明两者等效或非劣效,仍需进一步研究。
Objective To compare the efficacy of oral and intravenous proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in the prevention of rebleeding after endoscopic treatment of peptic ulcer. Methods Continuity was selected from August 2010 to May 2013. At the Meixian People’s Hospital, 100 cases of high Patients with peptic ulcer at risk of bleeding were randomized to oral lansoprazole and intravenous esomeprazole after successful endoscopic treatment. The primary end point of the study was the incidence of rebleeding within 14 days. Secondary end points were hospital stay, blood transfusion, surgical intervention and mortality within January. Results The rebleeding rate was 4% (2/50) in intravenous injection group and 4% (2/50) in oral group. The two groups of patients in hospitalization, blood transfusion, surgical intervention and mortality was no significant difference (P> 0.05). The mean length of stay in oral lansoprazole group was shorter than that in intravenous esomeprazole group (P <0.01). Conclusion Oral proton pump inhibitors have shorter hospital stays. There is no evidence that oral and intravenous PPI have different clinical effects. However, there is not enough evidence in this study to prove the equivalence or non-inferiority between the two, which needs further study.