Chinese General Practice ›› 2022, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (20): 2462-2467.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.02.001
Special Issue: 泌尿系统疾病最新文章合辑
• Article • Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:
2021-11-05
Revised:
2022-01-05
Published:
2022-07-15
Online:
2022-03-10
Contact:
Qiubi XU
About author:
通讯作者:
徐秋笔
作者简介:
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.02.001
组别 | 例数 | 性别(男/女) | 年龄(岁) | BMI(kg/m2) | 收缩压(mm Hg) | 舒张压(mm Hg) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 18/28 | 33.6±6.6 | 22.7±2.2 | 127±11 | 78±11 |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 20/27 | 34.4±8.8 | 22.4±2.0 | 129±8 | 77±11 |
t(χ2)值 | 0.113a | 0.457 | 0.811 | 1.187 | 0.400 | |
P值 | 0.737 | 0.649 | 0.420 | 0.238 | 0.690 |
Table 1 Comparison of general between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics at baseline
组别 | 例数 | 性别(男/女) | 年龄(岁) | BMI(kg/m2) | 收缩压(mm Hg) | 舒张压(mm Hg) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 18/28 | 33.6±6.6 | 22.7±2.2 | 127±11 | 78±11 |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 20/27 | 34.4±8.8 | 22.4±2.0 | 129±8 | 77±11 |
t(χ2)值 | 0.113a | 0.457 | 0.811 | 1.187 | 0.400 | |
P值 | 0.737 | 0.649 | 0.420 | 0.238 | 0.690 |
组别 | 例数 | 血红蛋白(mmol/L) | 血清白蛋白(g/L) | Scr(μmol/L) | 补体C3(g/L) | 补体C4(g/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 76.0±13.3 | 26.68±6.38 | 61.99±12.07 | 0.55±0.20 | 0.11±0.03 |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 75.6±12.6 | 25.96±6.05 | 62.03±12.96 | 0.56±0.15 | 0.12±0.02 |
t值 | 0.049 | 0.559 | 0.015 | 0.273 | 1.895 | |
P值 | 0.961 | 0.578 | 0.988 | 0.785 | 0.061 |
Table 2 Comparison of clinica indices between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics at baseline
组别 | 例数 | 血红蛋白(mmol/L) | 血清白蛋白(g/L) | Scr(μmol/L) | 补体C3(g/L) | 补体C4(g/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 76.0±13.3 | 26.68±6.38 | 61.99±12.07 | 0.55±0.20 | 0.11±0.03 |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 75.6±12.6 | 25.96±6.05 | 62.03±12.96 | 0.56±0.15 | 0.12±0.02 |
t值 | 0.049 | 0.559 | 0.015 | 0.273 | 1.895 | |
P值 | 0.961 | 0.578 | 0.988 | 0.785 | 0.061 |
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 16.8±4.9 | 8.7±3.6 |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 17.3±5.1 | 6.3±2.1 |
t值 | 0.520 | 4.090 | |
P值 | 0.604 | <0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of SLEDAI scores between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 16.8±4.9 | 8.7±3.6 |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 17.3±5.1 | 6.3±2.1 |
t值 | 0.520 | 4.090 | |
P值 | 0.604 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗4周后 | 治疗12周后 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 4.79±1.52 | 3.82±1.19a | 2.65±0.69a | 1.48±0.11a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 4.82±1.69 | 3.27±1.32a | 1.94±0.79a | 1.03±0.18a |
t值 | 0.090 | 2.109 | 4.612 | 14.510 | |
P值 | 0.929 | 0.038 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Table 4 Comparison of 24-hour urinary protein between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗4周后 | 治疗12周后 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 4.79±1.52 | 3.82±1.19a | 2.65±0.69a | 1.48±0.11a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 4.82±1.69 | 3.27±1.32a | 1.94±0.79a | 1.03±0.18a |
t值 | 0.090 | 2.109 | 4.612 | 14.510 | |
P值 | 0.929 | 0.038 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗4周后 | 治疗12周后 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 15.87±1.62 | 13.13±1.51a | 10.25±1.59a | 8.64±1.08a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 15.92±1.87 | 12.49±1.49a | 9.59±1.02a | 7.08±1.39a |
t值 | 0.138 | 2.057 | 2.388 | 6.035 | |
P值 | 0.891 | 0.043 | 0.019 | <0.001 |
Table 5 Comparison of BUN between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗4周后 | 治疗12周后 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 15.87±1.62 | 13.13±1.51a | 10.25±1.59a | 8.64±1.08a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 15.92±1.87 | 12.49±1.49a | 9.59±1.02a | 7.08±1.39a |
t值 | 0.138 | 2.057 | 2.388 | 6.035 | |
P值 | 0.891 | 0.043 | 0.019 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗4周后 | 治疗12周后 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 132.81±9.33 | 118.95±8.77a | 97.35±7.13a | 82.42±5.92a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 133.61±8.76 | 117.11±8.42a | 98.29±6.24a | 75.18±5.84a |
t值 | 0.426 | 1.032 | 0.677 | 5.937 | |
P值 | 0.671 | 0.305 | 0.500 | <0.001 |
Table 6 Comparison of Scr between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | 治疗前 | 治疗4周后 | 治疗12周后 | 治疗24周后 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 132.81±9.33 | 118.95±8.77a | 97.35±7.13a | 82.42±5.92a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 133.61±8.76 | 117.11±8.42a | 98.29±6.24a | 75.18±5.84a |
t值 | 0.426 | 1.032 | 0.677 | 5.937 | |
P值 | 0.671 | 0.305 | 0.500 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | IgE | IgG | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | ||
常规治疗组 | 46 | 26.32±3.42 | 21.89±2.87a | 15.92±3.22 | 12.93±2.47a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 26.51±3.15 | 18.60±1.53a | 16.03±3.24 | 10.28±2.65a |
t值 | 0.278 | 6.919 | 0.164 | 4.986 | |
P值 | 0.781 | <0.001 | 0.870 | <0.001 |
Table 7 Comparison of serum IgE and IgG between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | IgE | IgG | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | ||
常规治疗组 | 46 | 26.32±3.42 | 21.89±2.87a | 15.92±3.22 | 12.93±2.47a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 26.51±3.15 | 18.60±1.53a | 16.03±3.24 | 10.28±2.65a |
t值 | 0.278 | 6.919 | 0.164 | 4.986 | |
P值 | 0.781 | <0.001 | 0.870 | <0.001 |
组别 | 例数 | CRP(mg/L) | IL-6(μg/L) | TNF-α(μg/L) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | ||
常规治疗组 | 46 | 2.68±0.96 | 1.43±0.75a | 21.96±2.21 | 8.05±2.32a | 4.65±0.67 | 1.78±0.68a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 2.69±1.05 | 1.09±0.69a | 22.08±2.21 | 6.67±2.48a | 4.73±0.69 | 1.16±0.73a |
t值 | 0.048 | 2.276 | 0.262 | 2.770 | 0.567 | 4.236 | |
P值 | 0.962 | 0.025 | 0.794 | 0.007 | 0.572 | <0.001 |
Table 8 Comparison of serum CRP,IL-6 and TNF-α between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics before and after treatment
组别 | 例数 | CRP(mg/L) | IL-6(μg/L) | TNF-α(μg/L) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | 治疗前 | 治疗24周后 | ||
常规治疗组 | 46 | 2.68±0.96 | 1.43±0.75a | 21.96±2.21 | 8.05±2.32a | 4.65±0.67 | 1.78±0.68a |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 2.69±1.05 | 1.09±0.69a | 22.08±2.21 | 6.67±2.48a | 4.73±0.69 | 1.16±0.73a |
t值 | 0.048 | 2.276 | 0.262 | 2.770 | 0.567 | 4.236 | |
P值 | 0.962 | 0.025 | 0.794 | 0.007 | 0.572 | <0.001 |
Figure 1 Taxonomic cladogram of LEfSe analysis of fecal flora between healthy controls,lupus nephritis patients before treatment,lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics
样本 | 例数 | 甲酸 | 乙酸 | 丙酸 | 丁酸 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
健康志愿者 | 12 | 254.03±26.27 | 259.68±27.38 | 246.61±26.01 | 249.23±26.28 |
LN患者 | 93 | 232.12±21.50 | 153.99±13.21 | 146.21±12.51 | 147.76±12.65 |
t值 | 3.726 | 12.01 | 26.14 | 25.57 | |
P值 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.0001 |
Table 9 Changes of short-chain fatty acid concentrations in feces between healthy controls and lupus nephritis patients before treatment
样本 | 例数 | 甲酸 | 乙酸 | 丙酸 | 丁酸 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
健康志愿者 | 12 | 254.03±26.27 | 259.68±27.38 | 246.61±26.01 | 249.23±26.28 |
LN患者 | 93 | 232.12±21.50 | 153.99±13.21 | 146.21±12.51 | 147.76±12.65 |
t值 | 3.726 | 12.01 | 26.14 | 25.57 | |
P值 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.0001 |
样本 | 例数 | 甲酸 | 乙酸 | 丙酸 | 丁酸 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
健康志愿者 | 12 | 254.03±26.27 | 259.68±27.38 | 246.61±26.01 | 249.23±26.28 |
常规治疗组治疗24周后 | 46 | 235.33±24.06 | 188.86±22.70a | 179.33±21.59a | 181.24±21.81a |
干预治疗组治疗24周后 | 47 | 246.48±34.28 | 216.31±23.42ab | 205.41±22.23ab | 207.59±22.47ab |
F值 | 2.736 | 46.788 | 46.783 | 46.785 | |
P值 | 0.067 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.010 |
Table 10 Changes of short-chain fatty acid concentrations in feces between healthy controls and lupus nephritis patients with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics
样本 | 例数 | 甲酸 | 乙酸 | 丙酸 | 丁酸 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
健康志愿者 | 12 | 254.03±26.27 | 259.68±27.38 | 246.61±26.01 | 249.23±26.28 |
常规治疗组治疗24周后 | 46 | 235.33±24.06 | 188.86±22.70a | 179.33±21.59a | 181.24±21.81a |
干预治疗组治疗24周后 | 47 | 246.48±34.28 | 216.31±23.42ab | 205.41±22.23ab | 207.59±22.47ab |
F值 | 2.736 | 46.788 | 46.783 | 46.785 | |
P值 | 0.067 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.010 |
组别 | 例数 | 肝功能异常 | 感染 | 腹泻 | 心动过速 | 其他药物不良反应 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 4(8.70) | 8(17.39) | 2(4.35) | 2(4.35) | 16(34.78) |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 6(12.77) | 6(12.77) | 2(4.26) | 1(2.13) | 15(31.91) |
χ2值 | 0.635 | 0.625 | 0.022 | 0.607 | 0.293 | |
P值 | 0.526 | 0.533 | 0.983 | 0.532 | 0.769 |
Table 11 Comparison of adverse drug reactions after treatment between lupus nephritis patients treated with routine treatment,and routine treatment plus probiotics
组别 | 例数 | 肝功能异常 | 感染 | 腹泻 | 心动过速 | 其他药物不良反应 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
常规治疗组 | 46 | 4(8.70) | 8(17.39) | 2(4.35) | 2(4.35) | 16(34.78) |
干预治疗组 | 47 | 6(12.77) | 6(12.77) | 2(4.26) | 1(2.13) | 15(31.91) |
χ2值 | 0.635 | 0.625 | 0.022 | 0.607 | 0.293 | |
P值 | 0.526 | 0.533 | 0.983 | 0.532 | 0.769 |
[1] |
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[1] | MA Panpan, WANG Sijing, YOU Na, DING Dafa, LU Yibing. Efficacy and Safety of Danuglipron and Orforglipron in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(21): 2679-2685. |
[2] | ZHU Shengjie, DIAO Huaqiong, HANG Xiaoyi, SUN Wenjun. Network Meta-analysis of Different Traditional Chinese Medicine Injections for the Treatment of Posterior Circulatory Ischemic Vertigo [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(14): 1795-1808. |
[3] | LIU Caiping, ZHANG Yanhua, TANG Jianpin, WANG Chengpeng, XUE Fengfeng, WANG Huijuan, LI Chuanwei, ZHANG Guangya, LI Huafang. Efficacy and Safety of Long-acting Risperidone Microspheres in the Maintenance Treatment of Schizophrenia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(13): 1622-1627. |
[4] | MA Huping, REN Rong, HOU Mei, YUAN Aiyun. Clinical Observation of the New Antiepileptic Drug Perampanel in the Treatment of Refractory Epilepsy in Children Aged 0-18 Years [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(02): 250-256. |
[5] | YANG Can, LI Ning, LI Xuefei, ZHAO Li, XU Hao, SHI Qi, WANG Yongjun, LIANG Qianqian. Efficacy of Zang Bi Formula in Treating Arthritis and Its Pulmonary Complications in Rheumatoid Arthritis Interstitial Lung Disease Mice [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(24): 3015-3022. |
[6] | PANG Lan, LI Peifan, ZHU Xiaogang, YANG Zaihong, ZHENG Lei. Deep Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined with Escitalopram Oxalate in the Treatment of Depression: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(17): 2098-2103. |
[7] | ZHAO Yanan, HAN Shifan, LI Ying, ZHOU Liyuan, YANG Jie, WU Jiaxin, CHEN Ganggang. Efficacy of Virtual Reality Vestibular Rehabilitation Training in Patients with Sudden Deafness and Vertigo: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(14): 1672-1677. |
[8] | ZHANG Yong, WANG Senli, HUANG Ronghua, XU Fengping, LIU Dan. Intervention Effect of Music Therapy on Patients with Alzheimers Disease: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(12): 1511-1518. |
[9] | GAO Yuan, ZHOU Min, QIN Manfen, XU Xuan, YANG Liping, FU Yahong, HUANG Ying, WANG Wei. Effects of Health Coaching Combined with Wearable Devices on Glucose and Lipid Metabolism and Self-management Behavior in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(08): 908-914. |
[10] | ZHENG Rong, LIU Zhidong, WANG Miao, ZHANG Xiao, CHEN Junlan, ZHOU Shigao. A Randomized Controlled Study on Gehu Tiaozhi Decoction Intervening Patients with Metabolic Syndrome [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(03): 343-347. |
[11] | YAO lin, SHANG Danmei, ZHAO Hui, LIU Xinyu, LIU Yongwei, JIANG Yong. The Effect and Satisfaction of Mobile Network in the Hypertension Management of Community-dwelling Older Adults [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2024, 27(01): 85-90. |
[12] | YAO Yuzhong, MA Xiaojun, SONG Huan, ZHONG Yu. The Management Effect of Diabetes "1358 model" on Community Diabetes Patients Based on "Precision Management Combining General Care and Specialty Care" [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(34): 4308-4314. |
[13] | LI Qian, ZHANG Yunshu, YAN Baoping, WANG Jian, MA Yanjuan, WANG Yuan, QIN Yingjie, NA Long, REN Zhiyong, SUN Junwei, DENG Huaili, MA Hongjun, QU Xuehui, ZHOU Nan, SI Tianmei. Efficacy and Safety of Risperidone Microspheres for Injection (Ⅱ) in the Treatment of Patients with Acute Schizophrenia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(32): 4007-4012. |
[14] | YAO Junjie, SHANG Qiangqiang, WANG Yufeng, LI Jiahui, LIU Chang, PANG Tingting. Wearable Inertial Sensors-based Efficacy Evaluation of Comprehensive Traditional Chinese Medicine Therapy for Lumbar Disc Herniation Due to Qi-stagnation and Blood-stasis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(27): 3450-3455. |
[15] | LIU Minghao, WANG Pan, GAO Lijian, XU Shuqing, WANG Huanhuan, ZHAO Guangxian, CHEN Jue, QIAO Shubin, XU Bo, YUAN Jinqing. Feasibility, Safety and Timing of Secondary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention via Distal Transradial Artery Approach [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2023, 26(27): 3366-3372. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||