| Literature DB >> 35799719 |
Peng-Zhe Zhou1, Lei Gao2, Li-Wei Wang3, Ying-Fu Zhang4, Wei-Li Song5, Ying-Xia Hao6.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effect of magnesium aluminum carbonate combined with rabeprazole-based triple therapy in the treatment of patients with Helicobacter pylori-positive gastric ulcer associated with hemorrhage.Entities:
Keywords: Gastric ulcer; Gastrointestinal hemorrhage; Helicobacter pylori positive; Magnesium aluminum carbonate; Rabeprazole-based triple therapy; Treatment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35799719 PMCID: PMC9247804 DOI: 10.12669/pjms.38.5.5174
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pak J Med Sci ISSN: 1681-715X Impact factor: 2.340
Comparative analysis of general data between the experimental group and the control group (χ¯±S) n=40.
| Indicators | Experimental group | Control group | t/χ2 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years old) | 54.00±14.48 | 56.96±10.98 | 1.03 | 0.31 |
| Male (%) | 21 | 24 | 0.46 | 0.50 |
| Course of disease before treatment (years) | 3.25±0.78 | 3.47±1.02 | 1.08 | 0.27 |
| Smoking (%) | 29 | 32 | 0.62 | 0.43 |
| Drinking (%) | 28 | 23 | 1.35 | 0.24 |
| Ulcer diameter (cm) | 1.74±0.27 | 1.68±0.31 | 0.92 | 0.36 |
P>0.05.
Comparative analysis of symptoms before and after treatment between the two groups (χ¯±S) n=40.
| Group | Before treatment | After treatment | t | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abdominal pain | Experimental groupΔ | 2.53±0.51 | 0.38±0.10 | 26.16 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 2.46±0.63 | 1.05±0.36 | 12.29 | 0.00 | |
| t | 0.55 | 11.34 | |||
| p | 0.60 | 0.00 | |||
| Nausea and vomiting | Experimental groupΔ | 2.84±0.27 | 0.38±0.04 | 17.83 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 2.78±0.31 | 1.32±0.11 | 28.07 | 0.00 | |
| t | 0.92 | 17.39 | |||
| p | 0.36 | 0.00 | |||
| Abdominal distension | Experimental groupΔ | 2.83±1.01 | 1.23±0.21 | 9.81 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 2.77±0.73 | 2.05±0.54 | 5.01 | 0.00 | |
| t | 0.30 | 8.95 | |||
| p | 0.76 | 0.00 | |||
| Hematochezia | Experimental groupΔ | 2.17±0.36 | 0.25±0.04 | 33.52 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 2.25±0.17 | 0.82±0.10 | 45.86 | 0.00 | |
| t | 1.27 | 33.47 | |||
| p | 0.21 | 0.00 | |||
p >0.05, Δp <0.05.
Comparative analysis of serum indicators of gastric mucosal microenvironment after treatment between the experimental group and the control group (χ¯±S) n=40.
| Group | Before treatment | After treatmentΔ | t | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ERK (pg/ml) | Experimental groupΔ | 32.85±4.73 | 24.38±3.76 | 8.86 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 34.47±4.03 | 29.61±3.97 | 5.75 | 0.00 | |
| t | 0.11 | 3.32 | |||
| p | 0.92 | 0.01 | |||
| SOD(U/L) | Experimental groupΔ | 72.48±13.45 | 92.66±14.47 | 6.46 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 73.04±12.75 | 85.35±13.74 | 4.15 | 0.00 | |
| t | 0.19 | 2.32 | |||
| p | 0.85 | 0.02 | |||
| EGRF (pg/ml) | Experimental groupΔ | 1.47±0.35 | 0.37±0.06 | 7.74 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 1.38±0.44 | 0.78±0.03 | 4.73 | 0.00 | |
| t | 0.23 | 2.96 | |||
| p | 0.82 | 0.00 | |||
p>0.05, Δp<0.05.
Comparative analysis of ulcer healing after treatment between the two groups (χ¯±S) n=40.
| Group | Cured | Markedly effective | Effective | Invalid | Effective rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental group | 16 | 12 | 5 | 7 | 33 (82.5%) |
| Control group | 10 | 8 | 6 | 16 | 24 (60%) |
| χ2 | 4.94 | ||||
| P | 0.03 |
P<0.05
Comparative analysis of pathological results of gastroscopy before and after treatment between the two groups (χ¯±S) n=40.
| Group | Before treatment (%) | After treatment (%) | χ2 | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moderate and severe gastric mucosal inflammation (%) | Experimental groupΔ | 87.5%(35/40) | 10% (4/40) | 48.08 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 82.5% (33/40) | 30% (12/40) | 24.44 | 0.00 | |
| χ2 | 0.39 | 5.34 | |||
| P | 0.53 | 0.03 | |||
| Hp detection rate (%) | Experimental groupΔ | 100% (40/40) | 5% (2/40) | 72.38 | 0.00 |
| Control groupΔ | 100% (40/40) | 17.5%(7/40) | 53.33 | 0.00 | |
| χ2 | 3.13 | ||||
| p | 0.07 | ||||
p<0.05.