ObjectiveTo study the application value of mixed formulations consisting of paraffin oil, dimethyl silicone oil, and senna preparations in treatment for incomplete adhesive intestinal obstruction after laparotomy. MethodsOne hundred and twentyeight patients diagnosed incomplete adhesive intestinal obstruction admitted to this hospital from March 2005 to May 2008 were randomly divided into trial group and control group. For the control group, the tradition therapy including fasting, gastrointestinal decompression, fluid replacement therapy, and enema with soap and water were used for treatment. For the trial group, the mixed formulations consisting of paraffin oil, dimethyl silicone oil, and senna preparations were injected into stomach by the nasogastric tube on the basis of traditional treatment used for the control group. Some indicators including the successful rate of nonoperative treatment, the time that obstructive symptoms resolved and returned to normal exhaust and defecation and normal diet, and recurrence rate were compared between two groups. ResultsThe successful rate of nonoperative treatmentin in the trial group were significantly higher than that in the control group 〔92.1% (70/76) versus 69.2% (36/52), Plt;0.01〕. The average time that recovered to normal exhaust and defecation in the trial group and the control group was 32.5 d and 47.8 d, respectively. The average time that recovered to normal diet in the trial group and the control group was 3.2 d and 5.3 d, respectively. The time that recovered to normal exhaust and defecation, and diet in the trial group were significantly shorter than those in the control group (Plt;0.01). The recurrence rate had no significant difference between two groups (Pgt;0.05). ConclusionThe mixed formulations consisting of paraffin oil, dimethyl silicone oil, and senna preparations improve recovery of intestinal function and reduce surgical intervention rate.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical effect of lidocaine mucilage diluent and simethicone emulsion in gastroscopy examination, in order to provide effective drugs for gastroscopy. MethodsWe selected 201 outpatients and the inpatients who underwent gastroscopic examination between August and October 2014 as the research subjects. Based on the kind of drug, the patients were randomly divided into research group (n=100) and control group (n=101). Patients in the research group accepted lidocaine mucilage diluent, while those in the control group received simethicone emulsion. Then we observed and compared the definition of gastroscopy, adverse drug reactions, examination time and drug price between the two groups. ResultsThe frequencies of high, medium, and low definition of gastroscopy were respectively 63.00%, 34.00% and 3.00% among the patients in the research group, and 69.31%, 26.73% and 3.96% among patients in the control group; there was no significant differences between the two groups (Z=-0.854, P=0.393). The adverse reaction rates, testing time, and drug prices for the two groups were 0.99% vs.1.00% (P>0.05), (6.5±2.1) minutes vs.(6.6±2.0) minutes (t=0.458, P>0.05), and RMB (9.0±1.2) yuan vs.(42.8±2.8) yuan (t=227.644, P<0.05), respectively. ConclusionLidocaine mucilage diluent and simethicone emulsion both have good effect for gastroscopic examination, which can raise the gastroscopic definition, promote endoscopic operation and observation by doctors, shorten examination time, and reduce adverse drug reactions. Both are of great value in clinical application, and lidocaine hydrochloride mucilage diluent is cheaper, which can be widely used and promoted clinically.