| Literature DB >> 34804176 |
Yunfeng Wang1, Yan Zhang2, Zhongguo Liu3, Qiuying Li4, Huijing Jin5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a traditional Chinese medicine tonic, Buzhong Yiqi decoction has the effects of invigorating Qi and lifting Yang. In this study, the effects of Buzhong Yiqi Shenge decoction combined with THP bladder perfusion on postoperative efficacy in bladder cancer were investigated.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34804176 PMCID: PMC8601789 DOI: 10.1155/2021/3685213
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Comparison of general clinical data between two groups.
| Clinical parameters | Experimental group ( | Control group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||||
| ≤58 | 10 | 12 | 0.265 | 0.607 |
| >58 | 25 | 23 | ||
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 26 | 25 | 0.072 | 0.788 |
| Male | 9 | 10 | ||
| TNM stage | ||||
| Ta | 26 | 23 | 0.612 | 0.434 |
| T1 | 9 | 12 | ||
| Tumor grade | ||||
| G1 | 18 | 17 | 0.566 | 0.754 |
| G2 | 14 | 13 | ||
| G3 | 3 | 5 | ||
Comparison of KPS scores between two groups.
| Before treatment | 3 months after treatment | 6 months after treatment | 12 months after treatment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 73.65 ± 4.61 | 78.15 ± 10.31 | 82.47 ± 6.26 | 88.61 ± 11.32 |
| Experimental group | 72.21 ± 6.34 | 83.54 ± 6.37 | 90.92 ± 9.38 | 92.23 ± 7.26 |
|
| 2.153 | 2.578 | 1.354 | 2.047 |
|
| 0.655 | 0.028 | 0.034 | 0.421 |
Comparison of the serum VEGF level between two groups (pg/ml).
| Before treatment | 3 months after treatment | 6 months after treatment | 12 months after treatment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 379.1 ± 105.9 | 366.9 ± 120.1 | 353.7 ± 125.6 | 331.4 ± 135.2 |
| Experimental group | 381.4 ± 90.7 | 353.7 ± 110.4 | 329.5 ± 121.4 | 290.3 ± 142.8 |
|
| 0.914 | 2.563 | 1.685 | 2.264 |
|
| 0.745 | 0.306 | 0.042 | 0.027 |
Comparison of urine white blood cells between two groups (cells/μL).
| Before treatment | 3 months after treatment | 6 months after treatment | 12 months after treatment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 59.24 ± 6.41 | 25.26 ± 4.27 | 19.14 ± 2.41 | 9.37 ± 3.74 |
| Experimental group | 58.62 ± 8.36 | 20.14 ± 2.09 | 18.46 ± 3.12 | 9.10 ± 2.46 |
|
| 3.64 | 2.72 | 1.38 | 2.67 |
|
| >0.05 | 0.037 | >0.05 | >0.05 |
Comparison of recurrence rate between two groups.
|
| 6 months after treatment | 12 months after treatment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Recurrence rate (%) |
| Recurrence rate (%) | ||
| Control group | 32 | 6 | 18.75 | 8 | 25.00 |
| Experimental group | 33 | 4 | 12.12 | 6 | 18.18 |
|
| 0.548 | 0.447 | |||
|
| 0.459 | 0.504 | |||
Comparison of adverse reactions between two groups.
|
| Frequent and urgent urination | Nausea/loss of appetite | Low heat | Hematuria | Abnormal in urine routine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 32 | 25 (78.13%) | 16 (50.00%) | 8 (25.00%) | 11 (34.38%) | 15 (46.88%) |
| Experimental group | 33 | 12 (36.36%) | 8 (24.24%) | 5 (15.15%) | 6 (18.18%) | 7 (21.21%) |
|
| 4.093 | 4.628 | 0.985 | 2.206 | 4.779 | |
|
| 0.043 | 0.031 | 0.321 | 0.137 | 0.029 |