摘要
目的观察中西药结合治疗慢性前列腺炎的疗效。方法92例门诊慢性前列腺炎患者。年龄20～57岁,病程3个月～6年。均有下腹、会阴疼痛,排尿不适等症状,部分患者前列腺液（EPS）常规白细胞异常或细菌培养阳性,符合美国国立卫生院（NIH）制定的前列腺炎诊断标准。92例患者分为中西药结合治疗组（A组,46例）和单纯西药治疗组（B组,46例）,治疗前2组患者年龄、病程、症状评分（NIH-CPSI）、生活质量评分（QOL）及EPS检查数据差异无统计学意义。B组采用EPS培养细菌敏感的抗生素或大环内酯类药物,配合α受体阻滞剂及温水坐浴等物理治疗;A组在上述治疗基础上加用中药汤剂口服,每次1剂,每日2次。治疗6～8周后,比较2组患者起效时间及治疗前后NIH-CPSI、QOL及EPS检验结果变化。结果A、B 2组患者治疗后起效时间分别为（11．2±5．4）d和（18．1±6．7）d（P〈0．001）。A组治疗后NIH-CPSI和QOL评分分别为4．5±4．7和2．3±1．7,B组分别为7．8±4．1和3．7±1．7,2组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．001）;A组治疗前后NIH-CPSI与QOL下降幅度均较B组明显（P=0．02和P〈0．001）。A组治疗前EPS-WBC计数分类为：（-）19例、（＋）17例、（＋＋）5例、（＋＋＋）5例,治疗后（-）30例、（＋）14例、（＋＋）1例、（＋＋＋）1例,治疗前后差异有统计学意义（P=0．02）;B组治疗前EPS-WBC计数分类为：（-）13例、（＋）21例、（＋＋）4例、（＋＋＋）8例,治疗后为：（-）19例、（＋）21例、（＋＋）4例、（＋＋＋） 2例,治疗前后差异无统计学意义（P=0．19）;治疗后A组白细胞下降程度明显好于B组（P=0．02）。A组治疗前EPS细菌培养阴性18例、阳性28例,治疗后阴性34例、阳性12例;B组治疗前EPS细菌培养阴性19例、阳性27例,治疗后阴性34例、阳性12例,2组治疗后细菌培养阳性率均明显下降,差异有统计�
Objective To study the clinical efficacy of the combination of traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. Methods Ninty-two cases diagnosed as prostatitis according to the criteria of American Institute of Health （NIH） were included. Forty-six cases were treated with the combination of traditional Chinese medicine （premade soup） and antibiotics（group A）, other 46 cases were treated with antibiotics only（group B） for 6-8 weeks. The NIH chronic prostatitis symptom index （NIH-CPSI）, quality of life score, the expressed prostate secretion WBC count （EPS-WBC） and EPS bacterial culture were compared between 2 groups. Statistical analysis was done in the same group and between 2 groups. Results In group A, compared with the pre-treatment, the NIH-CPSI, quality of life score, EPS-WBC and EPS bacterial culture showed statistically significant improvement B （all P〈0.05）. In group of antibiotics only group, the NIH-CPSI, quality of life score, and EPS bacterial culture showed statistical significant improvement after the course of therapy （all P〈0. 05）. However, the EPS-WBC showed no difference pre-and posttherapy （P=0.19）. The improvements of NIH-CPSI and quality of life score of group A were greater than those of gorup B （P〈0.05）. The time to show significant improvement was shorter in group A than that in group B （P〈0.01）. The cure rate and significant improvement rate were higher in group A than group B （P〈0.01）. Conclusions The combination of antibiotics and traditional Chinese medicine may have synergic effect in treatment of chronic prostatitis. Compared with the antibiotics only therapy, the combination therapy could significantly improve the symptoms and treatment outcome.
出处
《中华泌尿外科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2007年第7期490-493,共4页
Chinese Journal of Urology
关键词
慢性前列腺炎
中药
西药
Chronic prostatitis
Traditional Chinese medicine
Western medicine
