| Literature DB >> 35126620 |
Naiqin Han1, Jialing Xie2, Qiuying Li3, Haixia Li4, Xiuzhen Wang5, Ying Sheng6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To explore the curative effect of Shuangshen Decoction combined with immunological preparations in the treatment of pediatric nephrotic syndrome and its influence on concurrent infection and recurrence rate.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35126620 PMCID: PMC8813236 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3355462
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
TCM syndrome score sheet (prepared based on relevant information and the clinical experience of the tutor).
| Main symptoms | 0 | 2 points | 4 points | 6 points |
| Sore waist and knees | None | Occasionally | Frequently | Unbearable |
| Chills | None | Occasionally | Frequently | Afraid of cold |
| Poor appetite | None | Reduce food intake by 1/4 | Reduce food intake by 1/4-1/2 | Little or no food |
| Secondary symptoms | 0 | 1 point | 2 points | 3 points |
| Tired | None | Occasionally | Frequently | Bedridden |
| Bloating | None | Slightly full | Fullness | Abdominal distension all day |
| Loose stools | None | 1 time/d | 2-3 times/d | >4 times/d |
| Nocturia | None | 2 times/night | 3 times/night | >4 times/night |
| Shortness of breath | None | Lack of energy | Lazy in words | Powerless speech |
| Pale complexion | None | Dull | Pale | Pale and dull |
Comparison of general information between the two groups before treatment.
| Index | Routine group ( | Combination group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 6.42 ± 1.16 | 6.55 ± 1.23 | 0.516 | 0.607 |
| Course (d) | 11.59 ± 2.25 | 11.68 ± 2.30 | 0.188 | 0.852 |
| Gender | 0.182 | 0.670 | ||
| Male | 25 (55.56) | 27 (60) | ||
| Female | 20 (44.44) | 18 (40) | ||
| Disease progression | 0.830 | 0.362 | ||
| Active nephrotic syndrome | 33 (73.33) | 29 (64.44) | ||
| Nephrotic syndrome in remission | 12 (26.67) | 16 (35.56) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 17.52 ± 2.44 | 17.69 ± 2.60 | 0.320 | 0.750 |
| White blood cell (×109/L) | 2.76 ± 0.54 | 2.85 ± 0.62 | 0.734 | 0.465 |
| Cholesterol (mmol/L) | 6.88 ± 1.23 | 6.59 ± 1.17 | 1.146 | 0.255 |
| Triglycerides (mmol/L) | 3.17 ± 0.84 | 3.20 ± 0.78 | 0.176 | 0.861 |
Figure 1The ALB level was compared between the routine group and the combined group. ∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01.
Figure 2The 24 h urine protein quantification was compared between the routine group and the combined group. ∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01.
Comparison of TCM syndrome scores between the two groups.
| Group | Routine ( | Combination ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 15.15 ± 1.20 | 15.20 ± 1.22 | ||
| 3 months after treatment | 12.47 ± 1.04 | 9.84 ± 0.72 | 13.948 | <0.001 |
| 6 months after treatment | 9.91 ± 0.53 | 7.22 ± 0.41 | 26.930 | <0.001 |
| 12 months after treatment | 8.84 ± 0.48 | 4.97 ± 0.51 | 37.068 | <0.001 |
Comparison of the clinical efficacy of the two groups [n (%)].
| Group | Routine ( | Combination ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Invalid | 11 (24.44) | 3 (6.67) | ||
| Effective | 19 (42.22) | 20 (44.44) | ||
| Markedly effective | 15 (33.33) | 22 (48.89) | ||
| Total effective rate | 34 (75.56) | 42 (93.33) | 5.414 | 0.020 |
Figure 3The infection rate and recurrence rate were compared between the routine group and the combined group. ∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01.
Comparison of the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups [n (%)].
| Group | Routine ( | Combination ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nausea and vomiting | 8 (17.78) | 2 (4.44) | 4.050 | 0.044 |
| Acne | 5 (11.11) | 0 (0) | 5.294 | 0.021 |
| Hypertension | 6 (13.33) | 1 (2.22) | 3.873 | 0.049 |
| Coagulopathy | 4 (8.89) | 0 (0) | 4.186 | 0.041 |