摘要
目的观察α-硫辛酸联合依帕司他治疗糖尿病痛性神经病变(PDN)的临床效果。方法294例PDN患者随机分为α-硫辛酸组、依帕司他组和α-硫辛酸-依帕司他联合组,每组各98例。比较各组足部压力觉异常点数、密西根神经病变量表(MNSI)症状问卷和足部检查评分、运动神经传导速度(MCV)和感觉神经传导速度(SCV)评分、健康调查简表(SF-36)生存质量评分及治疗总有效率。结果治疗后,α-硫辛酸-依帕司他联合组、α-硫辛酸组和依帕司他组足部压力觉异常点数[(5.61±0.75)vs(8.01±1.24)vs(8.13±1.23)个]、MNSI症状问卷[(5.66±0.55)vs(7.01±0.71)vs(6.84±0.68)分]、MNSI足部检查[(2.35±0.66)vs(4.13±0.77)vs(4.07±0.78)分]、正中神经MCV[(51.37±1.92)vs(44.98±1.93)vs(45.13±1.93)m/s]和SCV[(48.89±2.01)vs(44.63±1.91)vs(44.99±1.93)m/s]、腓总神经MCV[(49.57±1.88)vs(44.73±1.90)vs(45.01±1.89)m/s]、SCV[(51.42±2.13)vs(48.02±2.03)vs(48.21±2.01)m/s]、生理功能评分[(65.33±5.51)vs(53.47±5.41)vs(54.01±5.47)分]、躯体疼痛评分[(82.01±5.01)vs(69.54±4.97)vs(70.74±4.93)分]及治疗总有效率(91.84%vs 77.55%vs 79.59%)比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论与α-硫辛酸和依帕司他单药相比,α-硫辛酸-依帕司他联合用药治疗PDN的效果更为显著。
Objective To observe the clinical effect of α-lipoic acid combined with epalrestat on painful diabetic neuropathy （PDN）. Methods 294 patients with PDN were assigned into＇ lipoie acid group, epalrestat group and combined group with 98 cases in each group respectively treated with α-lipoic acid, epalrestat and combination therapy for 4 weeks. The abnormal foot plantar pressure, MNSI symptom questionnaire and foot examination score, MCV and SCV of median nerve and common peroneal nerve, SF- 36 survival quality score and total effective rate of three groups were compared. Results After treatment, the combinedgroup were significantly improved than the lipoie acid group and epalrestat group in abnormal foot plantar pressure[（5.61 ± 0.75） vs （8.01 ± 1.24） vs （8. 13 ±1.23） Point, P〈0. 011, MNSI symptom questionnaire [（5. 66±0. 55） vs （7.01±0.71） vs （6. 84±0.68）Score,P〈0. 013,MNSI foot examination score[（2.35±0. 66） vs （4. 13±0.77）vs （4.07±0.78）Score,P〈0.01],MCV[（51.37±1.92） vs （44.98±1.93） vs （45.13±1.93）m/s,P〈0. 011 and SCV[（48. 89±2.01） vs （44.63±1.91） vs （44.99±1.93）m/s,P〈0.01] of median nerve, MCVF（49. 57±1. 88） vs （44.73±1.90） vs （45.01±1.89）m/s,P〈0.01] and SCV[（51.42±2. 13） vs （48. 02±2.03） vs （48.21±2.01）m/s,P〈0.01] of common peroneal nerve,physiological function[（65.33±5.51） vs （53.47±5.41） vs （54. 01±5.47）Score, P〈0. 011, somatic pain [（82.01 ± 5.01） vs （69.54 ± 4. 97） vs （70. 74 =h 4. 93） Score, P 〈 0.011, total effective rate （91.84% vs 77.55% vs 79.59%,P〈0. 01）. Conclusion Compared with aqipoic acid or epalrestat treatment, the combined treatment is more effective on PDN.
出处
《中国糖尿病杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2016年第9期798-802,共5页
Chinese Journal of Diabetes
