| Literature DB >> 34691221 |
Shujuan Wang1, Min Wang1, Hongbin Zhang2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect observation on modified Zishen Tongguan decoction combined with acupuncture in the treatment of urinary retention after cervical cancer surgery and its influence on the incidence of adverse reactions.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34691221 PMCID: PMC8528598 DOI: 10.1155/2021/7338276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Route of experimental technique.
Comparison of baseline data (n = 42).
| Items | Group A | Group B |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (mean ± SD, years old) | 42.18 ± 3.46 | 42.23 ± 3.42 | 0.067 | 0.947 |
| BMI (mean ± SD, kg/m2) | 21.82 ± 1.03 | 21.76 ± 1.06 | 0.263 | 0.793 |
|
| ||||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 28 (66.67%) | 25 (59.52%) | 0.460 | 0.498 |
| Adenocarcinoma | 7 (16.67%) | 9 (21.43%) | 0.309 | 0.578 |
| Squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma | 5 (11.90%) | 7 (16.67%) | 0.389 | 0.533 |
| Small cell carcinoma | 2 (4.76%) | 1 (2.38%) | 0.346 | 0.557 |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Stage IB2 | 13 (30.95%) | 11 (26.19%) | 0.233 | 0.629 |
| Stage IIA1 | 17 (40.48%) | 19 (45.24%) | 0.194 | 0.659 |
| Stage IIA2 | 9 (21.43%) | 11 (26.19%) | 0.263 | 0.608 |
| Stage IIB1 | 3 (7.14%) | 1 (2.38%) | 1.050 | 0.306 |
| Surgery time (mean ± SD, min) | 155.48 ± 29.18 | 155.36 ± 30.19 | 0.019 | 0.985 |
| Bladder urinary retention (mean ± SD, ml) | 473.46 ± 36.74 | 475.25 ± 35.62 | 0.227 | 0.821 |
|
| 0.441 | 0.507 | ||
| Yes | 26 (61.90%) | 23 (54.76%) | ||
| No | 16 (38.10%) | 19 (45.24%) | ||
|
| 0.202 | 0.653 | ||
| Laparoscopic surgery | 27 (64.29%) | 25 (59.52%) | ||
| Laparotomy | 15 (35.71%) | 17 (40.48%) | ||
|
| ||||
| Married | 6 (14.29%) | 8 (19.05%) | 0.343 | 0.558 |
| Unmarried | 34 (80.95%) | 31 (73.81%) | 0.612 | 0.434 |
| Divorced | 2 (4.76%) | 3 (7.14%) | 0.213 | 0.645 |
|
| ||||
|
| 0.778 | 0.378 | ||
| Cities and towns | 16 (38.10%) | 20 (47.62%) | ||
| Countryside | 26 (61.90%) | 22 (52.38%) | ||
|
| ||||
| College and above | 8 (19.05%) | 7 (16.67%) | 0.081 | 0.776 |
| High school | 25 (59.52%) | 21 (50.00%) | 0.769 | 0.381 |
| Middle school and below | 9 (21.43%) | 14 (33.33%) | 1.497 | 0.221 |
Comparison of urination situation after therapy (mean ± SD, n = 42).
| Items | Average urinary flow rate (cm/s) | Maximum urinary flow rate (cm/s) | Urination time (s) | Detrusor pressure (cm·H2O) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group A | 8.32 ± 1.36 | 16.27 ± 2.27 | 34.18 ± 4.63 | 22.17 ± 3.18 |
| Group B | 6.27 ± 1.42 | 12.96 ± 2.31 | 41.26 ± 4.73 | 28.12 ± 3.21 |
|
| 6.757 | 6.623 | 6.932 | 8.534 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Figure 2Comparison of the number of patients with good recovery of bladder function and BC level values after therapy (n (%), mean ± SD). (a) Comparison of BC level values between the two groups after therapy. The horizontal axis represents group A and group B, and the vertical axis represents BC level value (ml/H2O). After therapy, the BC level values in group A and group B were 64.35 ± 8.34 ml/H2O and 56.23 ± 8.46 ml/H2O, respectively. There was a significant difference in BC level values between the two groups after therapy (t = 4.430, P < 0.001). (b) Comparison of the number of patients with good recovery of bladder function between the two groups after therapy. The horizontal axis represents group A and group B, and the vertical axis represents the number of patients with good recovery of bladder function (n (%)). After therapy, the number of patients with good recovery of bladder function in group A and group B were 39 (92.86%) and 32 (76.19%), respectively. There was a significant difference in the number of patients with good recovery of bladder function between the two groups after therapy (X2 = 4.459, P < 0.05).
Figure 3Comparison of OABSS scores at 7 d and 14 d of therapy (mean ± SD, n = 42). (a) Comparison of OABSS scores between the two groups at 7 d of therapy. The average OABSS scores of group A and group B at 7 d of therapy were 9.17 ± 1.72 points and 10.40 ± 1.67 points, respectively. (b) Comparison of OABSS scores between the two groups at 14 d of therapy. The average OABSS scores of group A and group B at 14 d of therapy were 5.58 ± 1.50 points and 7.98 ± 1.60 points, respectively. The horizontal axis represents group A and group B, and the vertical axis represents OABSS score (points). There was a significant difference in average OABSS scores between the two groups at 14 d of therapy (t = 7.092, P < 0.001).
Comparison of clinical efficacy (n (%)).
| Items |
| Cured | Markedly effective | Effective | Invalid | Total clinical effective rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group A | 42 | 23 (54.76) | 11 (26.19) | 6 (14.29) | 2 (4.76) | 95.24% (40/42) |
| Group B | 42 | 17 (40.48) | 9 (21.43) | 8 (19.05) | 8 (19.05) | 80.95% (34/42) |
|
| 4.087 | |||||
|
| <0.05 |
Comparison of incidence of adverse reactions (n (%)).
| Items |
| Rash | Salivation | Urinary tract infection | Nausea and vomiting | Total incidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group A | 42 | 1 (2.38) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 2 (4.76) | 7.14% (3/42) |
| Group B | 42 | 2 (4.76) | 1 (2.38) | 4 (9.52) | 3 (7.14) | 23.81% (10/42) |
|
| 4.459 | |||||
|
| <0.05 |