海桐皮汤熏洗治疗膝骨性关节炎

Clinical Therapy of Knee Osteoarthritis with Haitongpi Decoction

目的:观察海桐皮汤熏洗配合玻璃酸钠关节腔内注射治疗膝骨性关节炎的的疗效和安全性。方法:选取60例膝关节骨性关节炎患者,随机分成观察组和对照组各30例,均行关节腔内注射玻璃酸钠;观察组同时用海桐皮汤熏洗患膝关节,对照组口服洛索洛芬钠片,共治疗5周。分别于治疗前、治疗3周及5周后采用疼痛视觉模拟评分法(VAS)进行评分,评定标准评价疗效;并观察有无不良反应,检测肝肾功能。结果:治疗3周后对照组VAS评分低于观察组(P<0.05),5周后差异无统计学意义。治疗5周后,观察组临床控制6例、显效12例、有效10例、无效2例,对照组临床控制5例、显效13例、有效9例、无效3例。观察组未出现不良反应,肝肾功能检查正常。对照组出现胃痛3例,肝功能异常5例。结论:海桐皮汤熏洗结合玻璃酸钠关节腔内注射治疗膝骨性关节炎,毒副反应低,为更加安全的治疗方法。

ObjectiveTo observe the clinical curative effect and the safety of Haitongpi decoction fum-ing-washing therapy combined with sodium hyaluronate in treating knee osteoarthritis.MethodsSixty casesof patients with knee osteoaritis were selected, randomly divided into 2 groups： treatment group and controlgroup, 30 cases in each group, both group patients underwent intra-articular injections of Hyaluronan（once aweek for 5 weeks）. At the same time, the treatment group was treated with Haitongpi decoction fuming-washingtherapy（once a day） while the control group was treated with Loxoprofen sodium tablets（1 tablet each time, 3times a day）, add up to 5 weeks. VAS（Visual analogue scale） was used to evaluate the knee function beforetreatment, after 3 weeks of treatment and after 5 weeks of treatment. After 3 weeks treatment, drug-induced liv-er and kidney damages were observed.ResultsComparing the VAS scores of the two groups before treat-ment, the difference showed no statistical significance（P〉0.05）; after 3 weeks treatment, the VAS score of thetreatment group was lower than that of the control group with the difference of statistical significance（P〈0.05）;compared the two groups of VAS score after 5 weeks treatment, the difference showed no statistical significance（P〉0.05）. For the intragroup, compared before the treatment of VAS score of diseased knees after the treat-ment, the difference showed statistical significance（P〈0.05）; After 5 weeks of treatment, in the treatment group,6 cases were clinically controlled, 12 cases significantly effective, 10 cases effective, 2 cases ineffective, whilein the control group, 5 cases were clinically controlled, 13 cases significantly effective, 9 cases effective, 3 casesineffective, with no statistical significance（P〉0.05）. There was none with adverse reactions about the rash andstomach, and it was normal with liver and kidney function tests in, the treatment group; while in the controlgroup, there were 3 cases of stomach pain, 5 cases of abnormal liver function, with difference of statistical signifi-cance between the two groups（P〉0.05）.ConclusionBoth types of the treatments can effectively improve theknee joint function, and accelerate the knee joint function repairing. And in the treatment group the knee osteoar-thritis had low toxic reaction, providing a safer wayto patients.