期刊文献+

托烷司琼联合舒必利对顺铂方案化疗所致恶心、呕吐的影响 被引量:1

The effect of tropisetron combined with sulpiride on chemotherapy-induced cisplatin program nausea and vomiting
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨托烷司琼联合舒必利治疗顺铂方案化疗所致恶心、呕吐的疗效和安全性,进一步探讨对胃动素及胃泌素的影响。方法将84例接受顺铂方案治疗并出现恶心、呕吐的患者按随机排列表法分为研究组(44例)和对照组(40例),两组患者都给予盐酸托烷司琼静脉推注,研究组同时口服舒必利。观察两种治疗方案的疗效、不良反应及对胃动素和胃泌素的影响。结果研究组和对照组防治化疗所致的急性恶心的完全控制率分别为59.09%(26/44)和37.50%(15/40),有效率分别为90.91%(30/44)和72.50%(29/40),差异均有统计学意义(P〈0.05);研究组和对照组防治化疗所致的急性呕吐的完全控制率分别为61.36%(27/44)和37.50%(15,40),有效率分别为88.64%(39/44)和67.50%(27/40),差异均有统计学意义(P〈0.05);研究组和对照组防治化疗所致的延迟性恶心的完全控制率分别为54.54%(24/44)和32.50%(13/40),有效率分别为79.55%(35/44)和57.50%(23/40),差异均有统计学意义(P〈0.05);研究组和对照组防治化疗所致的延迟性呕吐的完全控制率分别为45.45%(20/44)和22.50%(9/40),有效率分别为75.00%(33/44)和52.50%(21/40),差异均有统计学意义(P〈0.05)。研究组和对照组治疗后血浆胃动素较治疗前明显降低[(308.35±14.59)ng/L比(370.59±15.72)ng/L和(341.87±18.38)ng,L比(365.36±23.72)ng/L],血浆胃泌素较治疗前明显升高[(206.97±12.29)ng/L比(164.56±14.17)ng/L和(171.58±13.53)ng/L比(158.42±17.29)ng/L],差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05),且两组治疗后比较差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05)。两组药物不良反应发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05)。结论托烷司琼联合舒必利能比常规使用托烷司琼获得更好的止吐效果。 Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of tropisetron combined with sulpiride in treatment of chemotherapy-induced cisplatin program nausea and vomiting, so as to explore the effect to motilin and gastrin. Methods A total of 84 patients with chemotherapy-induced cisplatin program nausea and vomiting were divided into study group (44 cases) and control group (40 cases) by random digits table method, the patients in two groups were given tropisetron hydrochloride intravenous injection, and the study group was added sulpiride. The efficacy and side effects and effect to motilin and gastrin were observed. Results The fully control rate and efficient rate in acute nausea was 59.09% (26/44),37.50% (15/40), and 90.91% (30/44), 72.50 % (29/40) in study group and control group, and there was signifiCant difference (P 〈 0.05 ). The fully control rate and efficient rate in acute vomiting was 61.36 % (27/44), 37.50 % (15/40), and 88.64% (39/44) ,67.50% (27/40) in study group and control group, and there was significant difference (P 〈0.05). The fully control rate and efficient rate in delayed nausea was 54.54% (24/44),32.50% (13/40), and 79.55 % (35/44), 57.50 % (23/40) in study group and control group, and there was significant difference (P 〈 0.05). The fully control rate and efficient rate in delayed vomiting was 45.45% (20/44), 22.50% (9/40),and 75.00% (33/44),52.50% (21140) in study group and control group, and there was significant difference (P 〈 0.05 ). The plasma motilin after treatment was lower than that before treatment in study group and control group[ (308.35 ± 14.59) ng/L vs.(370.59 ± 15.72) ng/L and(341.87 ± 18.38) ng/L vs. (365.36 ± 23.72) ng/L] ,gastrin was higher than that before treatment in study group and control group [ (206.97 ± 12.29) ng/L vs. ( 164.56 ± 14.17) ng/L and ( 171.58 ± 13.53) ng/L vs. ( 158.42 ± 17.29) ng/L], and there was significant difference (P 〈 0.05). There was significant difference in the plasma motilin and gastrin after treatment between two groups(P 〈 0.05 ). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of adverse drug reactions between two groups (P 〉 0.05). Conclusion Tropisetron combined with sulpiride than the routine use of tropisetron can obtain the better the antiemetic effect.
出处 《中国医师进修杂志》 2014年第18期15-18,共4页 Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine
基金 浙江省慈溪市科技计划(CN2012015)
关键词 药物疗法 舒必利 恶心 呕吐 托烷司琼 Drug therapy Sulpiride Nausea Vomiting Tropisetron
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

二级参考文献35

  • 1陆英杰,连至诚.胃肠激素对胃肠动力的影响[J].免疫学杂志,2006,22(z1):94-96. 被引量:55
  • 2秦叔逵,展皖遇,王琳,马永泉.枢复宁和吗丁啉联合控制化疗所致恶心呕吐的临床研究[J].实用癌症杂志,1994,9(4):260-261. 被引量:5
  • 3王宽宇,魏殿龙,孙晓龙.电针足三里、上巨虚促进腹部术后胃肠功能紊乱恢复40例临床观察[J].中国中医药科技,2005,12(5):316-317. 被引量:16
  • 4陈艳,丁莉坤,孟玲燕,丁黎,杨林,文爱东.盐酸帕洛诺司琼注射液人体药动学研究[J].中国新药杂志,2007,16(10):806-809. 被引量:14
  • 5Yang LP,Scott LJ.Palonosetron:in the prevention of nausea and vomiting.Drugs,2009,69:2257-2278.
  • 6Navari RM.Antiemetic control:toward a new standard of care for emetogenic chemotherapy.Expert Opin Pharmacother,2009,10:629-644.
  • 7Gralla R,Liehinitser M,Van Der Vegt S,et al.Palonosetron improves prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting followingmoderatelyemetogeniechemotherapy:resultsofa double-blind randomized phase Ⅲ trial comparing single doses of palonosetron with ondansetron.Ann Onco1,2003,14:1570-1577.
  • 8Lorusso V,Spedicato A,Petrucelli L,et al.Single dose of palonosetron plus dexamethasone to control nausea,vomiting and to warrant an adequate food intake in patients treated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC).Preliminary results.Support Care Cancer,2009,17:1469-1473.
  • 9Trotti A,Colevas AD,Setser A,et al.CTCAE v3.0:development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment.Semin Radiat Oncol,2003,13:176-181.
  • 10Aapro MS,Grunberg SM,Manikhas GM,et al.A phase Ⅲ,double-blind,randomized trial of palonosetron compared with ondansetroninpreventingchemotherapy-inducednauseaand vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy.Ann Oncol,2006,17:1441 -1449.

共引文献113

同被引文献13

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部