{"title":"三叶肽与抗酸药对胃溃疡和十二指肠溃疡患者的疗效和耐受性的对照临床评价。","authors":"H Hoetzinger","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A study was carried out in 30 out-patients with endoscopically confirmed active, benign gastric or duodenal ulceration to assess the comparative effectiveness and tolerance of treatment with triletide, a new synthetic tripeptide with anti-ulcer properties, with that of conventional antacids. Patients were allocated at random to receive treatment with either 1.6 g aluminium hydroxide and 1.6 g magnesium hydroxide per day or the antacids plus 1.5 g triletide per day over a period of 8 weeks. Heartburn and epigastric pain, monitored every other week, were significantly relieved by both treatments, but to a significantly greater extent (70% vs 20% on average, p less than 0.01) and significantly faster (p less than 0.01) in the presence of triletide. Endoscopic control showed that the patients who had triletide experienced complete healing in a significantly greater proportion (73% vs 27%, p less than 0.02) than those who had antacids only. The efficacy of treatments was the same, regardless of the actual ulcer location. Routine haematology and haematochemistry findings were unaffected by either treatment, and subjective possible side-reactions were limited to constipation (9 complaints overall) which is a well-known side-effect of antacid treatment. It would appear, therefore, that triletide is at least as well tolerated as antacids, while promoting the healing of peptic ulcers in a significantly greater proportion of patients and easing symptoms significantly faster and to a greater extent than antacids alone, regardless of the ulcer location.</p>","PeriodicalId":19862,"journal":{"name":"Pharmatherapeutica","volume":"4 3 Spec No","pages":"155-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1985-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Controlled clinical assessment of the efficacy and tolerance of triletide versus antacids in patients with gastric and duodenal ulcers.\",\"authors\":\"H Hoetzinger\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A study was carried out in 30 out-patients with endoscopically confirmed active, benign gastric or duodenal ulceration to assess the comparative effectiveness and tolerance of treatment with triletide, a new synthetic tripeptide with anti-ulcer properties, with that of conventional antacids. Patients were allocated at random to receive treatment with either 1.6 g aluminium hydroxide and 1.6 g magnesium hydroxide per day or the antacids plus 1.5 g triletide per day over a period of 8 weeks. Heartburn and epigastric pain, monitored every other week, were significantly relieved by both treatments, but to a significantly greater extent (70% vs 20% on average, p less than 0.01) and significantly faster (p less than 0.01) in the presence of triletide. Endoscopic control showed that the patients who had triletide experienced complete healing in a significantly greater proportion (73% vs 27%, p less than 0.02) than those who had antacids only. The efficacy of treatments was the same, regardless of the actual ulcer location. Routine haematology and haematochemistry findings were unaffected by either treatment, and subjective possible side-reactions were limited to constipation (9 complaints overall) which is a well-known side-effect of antacid treatment. It would appear, therefore, that triletide is at least as well tolerated as antacids, while promoting the healing of peptic ulcers in a significantly greater proportion of patients and easing symptoms significantly faster and to a greater extent than antacids alone, regardless of the ulcer location.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmatherapeutica\",\"volume\":\"4 3 Spec No\",\"pages\":\"155-60\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1985-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmatherapeutica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmatherapeutica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究对30例经内窥镜确认为活动性良性胃或十二指肠溃疡的门诊患者进行了研究,以评估三肽(一种新型合成的具有抗溃疡特性的三肽)与常规抗酸药治疗的比较疗效和耐受性。患者被随机分配接受治疗,每天1.6 g氢氧化铝和1.6 g氢氧化镁或抗酸剂加1.5 g三肽,为期8周。每隔一周监测一次的胃灼热和胃脘痛,两种治疗均显著缓解,但在三叶肽存在时,缓解程度明显更大(70% vs 20%, p < 0.01),缓解速度明显更快(p < 0.01)。内窥镜对照显示,与仅使用抗酸药的患者相比,使用三肽的患者完全愈合的比例明显更高(73% vs 27%, p < 0.02)。无论溃疡的实际位置如何,治疗的效果都是相同的。常规血液学和血液化学结果均未受两种治疗的影响,主观可能的副作用仅限于便秘(总共9例),这是抗酸治疗的众所周知的副作用。因此,三联肽的耐受性至少与抗酸药一样好,同时促进消化性溃疡愈合的患者比例明显高于单独使用抗酸药,且缓解症状的速度和程度明显高于单独使用抗酸药,无论溃疡位置如何。
Controlled clinical assessment of the efficacy and tolerance of triletide versus antacids in patients with gastric and duodenal ulcers.
A study was carried out in 30 out-patients with endoscopically confirmed active, benign gastric or duodenal ulceration to assess the comparative effectiveness and tolerance of treatment with triletide, a new synthetic tripeptide with anti-ulcer properties, with that of conventional antacids. Patients were allocated at random to receive treatment with either 1.6 g aluminium hydroxide and 1.6 g magnesium hydroxide per day or the antacids plus 1.5 g triletide per day over a period of 8 weeks. Heartburn and epigastric pain, monitored every other week, were significantly relieved by both treatments, but to a significantly greater extent (70% vs 20% on average, p less than 0.01) and significantly faster (p less than 0.01) in the presence of triletide. Endoscopic control showed that the patients who had triletide experienced complete healing in a significantly greater proportion (73% vs 27%, p less than 0.02) than those who had antacids only. The efficacy of treatments was the same, regardless of the actual ulcer location. Routine haematology and haematochemistry findings were unaffected by either treatment, and subjective possible side-reactions were limited to constipation (9 complaints overall) which is a well-known side-effect of antacid treatment. It would appear, therefore, that triletide is at least as well tolerated as antacids, while promoting the healing of peptic ulcers in a significantly greater proportion of patients and easing symptoms significantly faster and to a greater extent than antacids alone, regardless of the ulcer location.