| Literature DB >> 36188425 |
Yu Liu1, Yingjie Sun1, Xince Wang1, Dongsheng Wang1, Li Zeng1, Qingge Lu1.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the efficacy of the Panax notoginseng Ejiao suppository in patients with ulcerative proctitis and its effect on inflammatory response and immune function.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36188425 PMCID: PMC9519316 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1479964
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dis Markers ISSN: 0278-0240 Impact factor: 3.464
Baseline data.
| Study group ( | Control group ( |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 42.15 ± 11.25 | 44.65 ± 13.46 | 1.008 | 0.316 |
| Gender | 0.372 | 0.542 | ||
| Male | 28 | 31 | ||
| Female | 22 | 19 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 25.19 ± 5.23 | 26.21 ± 5.18 | 0.980 | 0.330 |
| Course of disease | 4.59 ± 1.02 | 4.71 ± 1.13 | 0.557 | 0.579 |
| Involved sites | 0.679 | 0.410 | ||
| Rectum | 21 | 17 | ||
| Rectosigmoid colon | 29 | 33 |
Comparison of clinical efficacy between the two groups of patients.
| Cured | Markedly effective | Effective | Ineffective | Total effectiveness | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group ( | 30 | 5 | 4 | 11 | 78.00% |
| Study group ( | 42 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 94.00% |
|
| 5.316 | ||||
|
| 0.021 |
Comparison of modified Mayo score and Baron endoscopic score between two groups of patients ().
| Modified Mayo score | Baron endoscopic score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | |
| Control group ( | 7.52 ± 1.12 | 3.25 ± 0.65 | 1.86 ± 0.37 | 0.72 ± 0.18 |
| Study group ( | 7.29 ± 1.43 | 2.79 ± 0.54 | 1.77 ± 0.32 | 0.48 ± 0.12 |
|
| 0.315 | 4.830 | 1.374 | 5.949 |
|
| 0.754 | <0.001 | 0.173 | <0.001 |
Figure 1Comparison of inflammatory factor levels between the two groups; CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8 indices were compared between the two groups before and after therapy to evaluate inflammatory factor levels. The results revealed that the inflammatory variables in the two groups were identical before treatment, and the indices were dramatically reduced after treatment, with the study group having lower values.∗∗ means P < 0.01, ∗∗∗ means P < 0.001.
Comparison of immune indicators (, %).
| Th 17 | Treg | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | |
| Control group ( | 18.25 ± 3.53 | 11.25 ± 2.85 | 4.02 ± 0.86 | 5.69 ± 1.16 |
| Study group ( | 17.19 ± 3.26 | 9.11 ± 2.26 | 3.95 ± 0.76 | 6.85 ± 1.42 |
|
| 1.560 | 4.160 | 0.431 | 4.473 |
|
| 0.122 | <0.001 | 0.667 | <0.001 |
Comparison of symptom improvement time (, day).
| Stomach ache | Diarrhea | Mucous pus and bloody stool | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group ( | 5.36 ± 1.25 | 4.15 ± 0.95 | 7.28 ± 1.53 |
| Study group ( | 4.11 ± 1.13 | 3.26 ± 0.72 | 6.11 ± 1.26 |
|
| 5.245 | 5.280 | 4.174 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Comparison of recurrences.
| 3 months after treatment | 6 months after treatment | |
|---|---|---|
| Control group ( | 6 (12.00%) | 15 (30.00%) |
| Study group ( | 2 (4.00%) | 5 (10.00%) |
|
| 2.174 | 6.250 |
|
| 0.140 | 0.012 |