| ObjectiveTo observe the clinical effect of Taking Oral Chinese medicine Sheng Duping Mu Tang combined with diclofenac sodium embolization on Functional Anorectal Pain,in order to find an effective treatment for FAP.MethodsIn accord with a standard and finally complete the FAP patients in the study of 100 cases,the treatment group and control group 50 cases each,the treatment group used tonga subtraction oral Chinese medicine rise du ping wood with anal diclofenac sodium embolism therapy,the control group treated with diclofenac sodium embolism anal,two groups of patients were in 14 days for a period of treatment,record the pain digital rating of two groups of patients before and after treatment(numerical rating scale,NRS score),quality of life health survey profile score(SF-36 scale),The overall therapeutic effect,the change of main accompanying symptoms and the recurrence of pain after 1 month were observed.ResultsComparison of general data:there were no statistically significant differences in age,course of disease and sex ratio between the two groups(P>0.05),indicating comparability.Comparison of NRS scores:Before treatment,there was no significant difference in scores between the two groups(Mann-whiteny U=1094.000,P=0.270>0.05),indicating comparability.After treatment,there was a significant difference in NRS scores between the two groups(Mann-Whiteny U=940.500,P=0.030<0.05),and the difference in scores between the two groups showed a significant difference(Mann-Whiteny U=590.500,P=0.000<0.05).Compared with the control group before treatment,there was a significant difference in NRS scores between the treatment group and the control group(Wilconxon Z=-5.712,P=0.000<0.05),and there was also a significant difference in NRS scores between the control group and the treatment group(Wilconxon Z=-4.909,P=0.000<0.05).The pain scores of both groups were lower than before,and the treatment group was superior to the control group in pain relief.Comparison of SF-36 scores:Before treatment,there was no significant difference in scores between the two groups(mann-whiteny U=1175.500,P=O.606>0.05),indicating comparability.After treatment,there was a significant difference in sF-36 scores between the two groups(Mann-Whiteny U=853.500,P=0.006<0.05),and the difference in scores between the two groups showed a significant difference(Mann-Whiteny U=408.000,P=0.000<0.05).Compared with the control group before treatment,after treatment,there was a significant difference in the sF-36 score of patients in the treatment group(Wilconxon Z=-4.887,P=0.000<0.05),and there was also a significant difference in the SF-36 score of patients in the control group(Wilconxon Z=-4.119,P=0.000<0.05),The quality of life of patients in both groups was improved,and the treatment group was better than the control group in improving the quality of life of patients.Comparison of overall efficacy:After treatment,10 cases(20.00%)were cured in the treatment group,36 cases(72.00%)were effective,and 4 cases(8.00%)were ineffective.In the control group,4 cases(8.00%)were cured,35 cases(70.00%)were effective,and 11 cases(22.00%)were ineffective.There was a significant difference between the two groups(Wann-Whitney U=-215.500,P=0.000<0.05).The total effective rate of the treatment group was 92.00%,while that of the control group was 78.00%.the total effective rate of the treatment group was higher than that of the control group,with statistically significant difference(P=0.045<0.05).Comparison of the efficacy of defecation disorders:Before treatment,there were 37 cases in the treatment group and 26 cases in the control group.After treatment,9 cases were cured in the treatment group,24 cases were effective and 4 cases were ineffective,while 0 cases were cured in the control group,8 cases were effective and 18 cases were invalid.There was a significant difference in efficacy between the two groups(Mann-Whitney U=198.000,P=0.005<0.05).The total effective rate was 89.18%in the treatment group and 30.76%in the control group.the effect of defecation disorder in the treatment group was higher than that in the control group,with statistically significant difference(P=0.000<0.05).Comparison of therapeutic effects of urinary system disorders:Before treatment,there were 13 cases in the treatment group and 15 cases in the control group.After treatment,there were 3 cases cured in the treatment group,8 effective cases and 2 invalid cases,and 0 cases cured in the control group,3 effective cases and 12 invalid cases.The total effective rate of the treatment group was 84.61%,while that of the control group was 20.00%.The curative effect of the treatment group was higher than that of the control group,with statistically significant difference(P=0.002<0.05).Comparison of the efficacy of reproductive system disorders:Before treatment,there were 12 cases in the treatment group and 12 cases in the control group.After treatment,there were 0 cases cured in the treatment group,3 cases effective and 9 cases ineffective,and 0 cases cured,0 cases effective and 12 cases ineffective in the control group.There was a difference in efficacy between the two groups(Mann-Whitney U=28.000,P=0.056>0.05).The total effective rate of the treatment group was 25.00%,while that of the control group was 0.00%.There was no significant difference between the two groups(P=0.217>0.05)in improving the patient’s reproductive system disorders,and there was no significant effect between the two groups in improving the patient’s reproductive system disorders.Comparison of the efficacy of functional abdominal distension or abdominal pain(mainly in pubic and bilateral inguinal regions)between the two groups:Before treatment,there were 11 cases of patients with functional abdominal distension or abdominal pain in the treatment group and 10 cases in the control group.After treatment,5 cases recovered in the treatment group,9 cases were effective and 2 cases were ineffective,while 0 cases recovered in the control group,2 cases were effective and 8 cases were ineffective.There was a significant difference in efficacy between the two groups(Mann-Whitney U=0.000),P=0.000<0.05).The total effective rate was 81.81%in the treatment group and 20.00%in the control group.The therapeutic effect of functional abdominal distension or abdominal pain in the treatment group was higher than that in the control group,with statistically significant difference(P=0.009<0.05).Comparison of pain recurrence rate:One month after the end of treatment,4 patients in the treatment group and 14 patients in the control group presented anorectal pain recurrence.There was no significant increase in pain between the two groups,and the difference in efficacy was statistically significant(Wann-Whitney U=0.000,P=0.000<0.05).The total effective rate was 84.00%in the treatment group and 50.00%in the control group.The total effective rate of the treatment group was higher than that of the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P=0.003<0.05).ConclusionTraditional Chinese medicine Shengdu Pingmu decoction combined with diclofenac sodium embolization can effectively relieve the pain symptoms of FAP patients and improve the quality of life of patients.Symptoms in improving patients with traditional Chinese medicine plays a main advantage,although in improving reproductive system disorders in patients with no statistical difference in both groups,but the treatment group in improving the defecation dysfunction,urinary dysfunction,in patients with functional abdominal distension or pain in the control group have obvious advantages,but also in terms of pain recurrence,the treatment group can effectively reduce the recurrence of FAP pain. |
PDF Full Text Request