【摘要】：目的評價抗菌藥物保守治療與闌尾切除術(shù)治療單純性急性闌尾炎(AA)的療效與安全性。方法計算機(jī)檢索中國生物醫(yī)學(xué)文獻(xiàn)數(shù)據(jù)庫(CBM,1978年至2015年6月)、相關(guān)期刊論文(CNKI,1979年至2015年6月)、Medline(1950年至2015年6月)、Pubmed(1950年至2015年6月)、Embase(1970年至2015年6月)和Cochrane圖書館(2015年第2期),收集抗菌藥物保守治療與闌尾切除術(shù)治療單純性AA的隨機(jī)對照試驗(yàn)(RCT),按照Cochrane系統(tǒng)評價方法,由兩名研究者獨(dú)立地對符合納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的試驗(yàn)進(jìn)行資料提取,并對納入文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行質(zhì)量評估和對提取的有效數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行Meta分析。結(jié)果納入6個RCTs,共1 510例單純性AA患者符合納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn),其中使用抗菌藥物治療的有767例,采用闌尾切除術(shù)治療的有743例。與手術(shù)治療比較,抗菌藥物保守治療的有效率降低了25.00%(RD=-0.25,95%CI:-0.35~-0.14),復(fù)發(fā)率升高48.43倍(OR=48.43,95%CI:16.94~138.44),勞動力喪失時間縮短1.52d(MD=-1.52,95%CI:-3.02~-0.02),但在并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率(RD=-0.06,95%CI:-0.15~0.03)、疼痛時間(MD=-0.76,95%CI:-3.31~1.79)、住院時間(MD=4.60,95%CI:-0.89~10.09)、病假時間(MD=-2.39,95%CI:-5.62~0.84)方面兩種治療方法比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P0.05)。結(jié)論闌尾切除術(shù)可能仍是治療單純性AA的金標(biāo)準(zhǔn)方法。
[Abstract]:Objective to evaluate the efficacy and safety of conservative antimicrobial therapy and appendectomy in the treatment of simple acute appendicitis (AA). Methods the Chinese biomedical literature database (CBM, 1978-June 2015), the China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI, 1979-June 2015), the Medline (1950-June 2015) and the Cochrane Library (1970-June 2015) were searched by computer. Phase 2), (RCT), a randomized controlled trial of conservative antimicrobial therapy and appendectomy for simple AA, was evaluated according to the Cochrane system. The data were extracted by two researchers independently, and the quality of the literature was evaluated and the valid data were analyzed by Meta. Results A total of 1 510 patients with simple AA were included in 6 RCTs, including 767 patients treated with antimicrobial agents and 743 patients treated with appendectomy. Compared with surgical treatment, 鎶楄弻鑽墿淇濆畧娌葷枟鐨勬湁鏁堢巼闄嶄綆浜，

本文編號：2194783