中药溃康宁胶囊治疗消化性溃疡脾虚瘀热型的临床分析-clinical analysis of treating peptic ulcer of spleen deficiency, blood stasis and heat type with traditional chinese medicine kukangning capsule.docxVIP

中药溃康宁胶囊治疗消化性溃疡（脾虚瘀热型）的临床研究 中药溃康宁胶囊治疗消化性溃疡（脾虚瘀热型）的临床研究 摘要 摘要 - - PAGE 10 - - - PAGE 11 - Clinical Study of Treating Peptic Ulcer With Kuikangning capsule An Li (Traditional Chinese Medicine with scientific) Directed by Professor of Tang Jianguang Abstract Object：Corning observation kuikangning capsule in the treatment of peptic ulcer (Peptic Ulcer, refered to as PU) (pixuyure type) of clinical efficacy ， explored kuikangning capsule of peptic ulcer (pixuyure type) the mechanism to guide its clinical use. Methods：Clinical choose the peptic ulcer (pixuyure type) 60 cases of patients with diagnostic criteria，1:1 randomized controlled design in accordance with the treatment group is divided into 30 cases, 30 cases of control group; Treatment group kuikangning capsules, each piece costs 0.3g, daily three times four, three meals a day half an hour prior to oral administration, six weeks of continuous use; Control group given omeprazole capsule 20mg, Bid, po;. Amoxicillin Capsules 1000mg, Bid, po ； Metronidazole Tablets 200mg, Tid, po. A course of treatment for one weeks. Changed after one weeks of omeprazole capsule 20mg, Bid, po and then take five weeks. Results: ①The comparison of the symptom curative effect of traditional chinese medicine manifestated that there is a significant difference(P0.05) or very significant difference(P0.01)between the two groups in the recovery or improvation of the symptoms such as stomach pain fatigue.there is not a significant difference (P0.05) between the treatment group and the control group at the cancellation or improvement of the waterbrash,heartburn.②The gastroscope shown that the drugs of two groups could both improve the repairing of the stomach mucous and there is not a significant difference (P0.05) between the treatment group and the control group.③ Analysis of adverse reactions, the two groups by statistical analysis There was significant difference (P 0.05), the treatment group than th