肝爽颗粒治疗非酒精性脂肪性肝纤维化的临床安全性及疗效分析
王岩,田洪霞(1 济钢医院消化内科,济南,山东,250101)
【摘要】目的:探讨肝爽颗粒治疗非酒精性脂肪性肝纤维化患者的临床安全性及疗效。方法:选取2017年8月-2018年4月在济南市济钢医院就诊的非酒精性脂肪性肝纤维化患者132例,以1:1比例将患者随机分为两组,实验组在常规西药保肝药物的基础上给予肝爽颗粒治疗,对照组给予常规西药保肝药物治疗,两组疗程均为24周。观察两组患者治疗后临床症状及肝功指标、肝纤维化指标、肝脾B超及肝脏硬度值变化。记录不良反应发生情况;采用SPSS17.0对结果进行分析。结果:经过24周的治疗后,实验组和对照组患者临床症状(乏力、纳差、腹胀、目黄)、肝功指标(ALT、AST、TBiL、Alb)水平、肝纤维化指标( HA、LN、PC-Ⅲ、IV-C)、肝脏硬度值、B超指标(门静脉直径、脾脏厚度及脾静脉直径)较治疗前均明显改善。两组患者治疗后相比,临床症状(乏力、纳差、腹胀、目黄)的改善不存在统计学差异(t值分别为0.000,0.326,0.193,0.993,P值分别为1,0.568,0.661,0.319);实验组肝功指标(ALT、AST、Alb)水平较对照组治疗后改善明显,差异存在统计学差异(t值分别为13.588,12.556,5.865,P值分别为<0.001,<0.001,0.662,<0.001);实验组肝纤维化指标水平( HA、LN、PC-Ⅲ、IV-C)较对照组治疗后改善明显,差异存在统计学差异(t值分别为7.381、10.139、6.834、 10.971;P值均<0.001);实验组肝脏硬度值较对照组治疗后改善明显,差异存在统计学差异(t=9.295,P<0.001);两组治疗后B超结果(门静脉直径,脾脏厚度,脾静脉直径)未出现明显变化,实验组和对照组不存在统计学差异(t值分别为1.068,1.136,1.081,P值分别为0.152,0.141,0.151)。按本研究制定的肝功能改善疗效判定标准,治疗后实验组ALT水平改善有效率明显优于对照组,存在统计学差异(X2=6.186,P=0.013);按本研究制定的肝纤维化指标改善疗效判定标准,实验组肝纤维化改善有效率明显优于对照组,存在统计学差异(X2=35.526,P<0.001);实验过程中两组均未出现明显不良反应。结论:肝爽颗粒可明显改善非酒精性脂肪性肝纤维化患者肝功能及肝纤维化程度,疗效显著。
【关键词】非酒精性脂肪性肝纤维化;肝爽颗粒;临床疗效;临床安全性;
The safety and efficacy of Ganshuang granules therapy on patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver fibrosis.
Wang Yan, Tian Hongxia ( The department of Gastroenterology, Jigang Hospital, Jinan, Shandong 250101)
【Abstract】Objective: To explore the safety and efficacy of Ganshuang granules therapy on patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver fibrosis. Methods: 132 patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver fibrosis who were hospitalized in Jigang Hospital from August 2017 to April 2018 were collected. The patients were randomly divided into two groups at 1:1 ratio. 66 patients were given the conventional treatment and Ganshuang granules therapy in treatment group, and 66 cases were given the conventional treatment in control group. The treatment course was 24 weeks. The clinical symptoms, liver function indexes, liver fibrosis indexes, liver and Spleen Ultrasound and liver hardness of the 2 groups were observed after .the treatment. The occurrence of adverse reactions was recorded. SPSS17.0 was used in our study. Results:After 24 weeks of treatment, the clinical symptoms (fatigue, dysphasia, abdominal distention, eye yellow), liver function index (ALT, AST, TBiL, Alb), liver fibrosis index (HA, LN, PC- III, IV-C), liver hardness value, B ultrasonic index (portal vein diameter, spleen thickness and splenic vein diameter) were better than before. After the treatment, compared with the two groups, there was no statistical difference in the improvement of clinical symptoms( weak, Hiccup, abdominal distention, Eye yellow) ( t was 0.000,0.326,0.193,0.993,respectivly, P was 1,0.568,0.661,0.319, respectivly ). The level of liver function index (ALT, AST, Alb) in the experimental group was better than that of the control group. The difference has statistically significant (t was 13.588,12.556,5.865, respectivly , P was <0.001, <0.001, 0.662, <0.001 respectivly ). The indexes of liver fibrosis index (HA, LN, PC- III, IV-C) in the experimental group were better than those in the control group (t was 7.381, 10.139, 6.834, 10.971, respectively, All P<0.001). The liver hardness of the experimental group was better than the control group, the difference has statistically significant (t=9.295, P<0.001). There was no significant change in B ultrasound ( the diameter of the portal vein, the thickness of the spleen, the diameter of the splenic vein) after treatment in the two groups (t was 1.068, 1.136, 1.081, respectivly , P was 0.152, 0.141, 0.151, respectivly ). According to the standard of evaluating the effect of liver function in our study, the effective rate of ALT level in the experimental group was significantly better than that of the control group (X2=6.186, P=0.013). The improvement of liver fibrosis in the experimental group was better than that of the control group. There has statistical difference (X2=35.526, P<0.001). No adverse reactions occurred in the two groups during the experiment. Conclusion: Ganshuang granules can significantly improve liver function and liver fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver fibrosis.
【key words】 nonalcoholic fatty liver fibrosis; Ganshuang granules ;the safety of clinical;the efficacy of clinical;
随着肥胖和2型糖尿病的增多,非酒精性脂肪性肝病(nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, NAFLD)已成为世界范围内最常见的慢性肝脏疾病[1-3]。临床上,可表现为单纯性脂肪肝(simple fatty liver, SFL)、非酒精性脂肪性肝炎(nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, NASH),肝纤维化甚至进展为肝硬化和肝癌,从而导致肝病相关死亡率的增加[4,5]。据最新统计,普通成人NAFLD发病率约为25.24%[6],中国成人NAFLD的发病率约为15%,其中10%-20%为NASH,NASH患者中,肝纤维化进展比例为40.76%,其中有25%的人可以向肝硬化进展[7,8]。肝纤维化是NAFLD患者发展为肝硬化的必经阶段。早期肝纤维化是可逆的,到后期假小叶形成发展为肝硬化阶段则是不可逆的。因此采取积极有效的治疗手段阻断其向肝纤维化及肝硬化的进展,是NAFLD防治关键。肝纤维化发病机制目前未完全明了,临床上尚缺乏安全有效的抗肝纤维化的治疗方案。本研究应用肝爽颗粒治疗非酒精性脂肪性肝纤维化患者24周,观察其在抗肝纤维化方面的临床安全性及疗效。
1 资料与方法
1.1病例选择:选取2017年8月-2018年4月在济南市济钢医院就诊的非酒精性脂肪肝(NAFLD)肝纤维化患者132例。诊断符合《非酒精性脂肪性肝病诊疗指南(2018年修订版)》[9]及《肝纤维化中西医结合诊疗指南》(2006年版)[10]。B超结果由两位不同的高职称超声医师判断,如有差别,请第三位超声医师参与判断;本研究为随机、成组设计及平行对照的前瞻性研究。按照就诊先后次序,132例患者以1:1比例随机分为两组,实验组66例,对照组66例,所有患者均签署知情同意书并且经医院伦理委员会批准同意。
1.2治疗方法:观察组服用常规保肝药物及肝爽颗粒(购自步长公司),1袋/次,每袋3g;观察组服用常规保肝药物;均3次/d,均服用24周;所有的患者在本研究入组前6个月均未参加过抗纤维化及免疫调节药物治疗,在观察期间均不使用与治疗本病有关的其他种类的药物。
1.3 实验仪器:FibroScan测定肝脏弹性值(法国Echosens公司);彩色多普勒超声检查仪器型号为LOGIQ 9。
1.4 观察指标:观察治疗前后两组患者的主要临床症状( 乏力、纳差、腹胀、目黄)改善情况;治疗前后患者的肝功能指标(谷丙转氨酶(glutamic pyruvic transaminase, ALT)、谷草转氨酶(glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase, AST)、总胆红素(total bilirubin, TBiL)、白蛋白(Albumin, Alb))的变化;治疗前后患者的肝纤维化指标包括层黏连蛋白(Laminin, LN)、Ⅲ型前胶原(type Ⅲ procollage, PC-Ⅲ)、Ⅳ型胶原(Type IV collagen, IV-C)、及透明质酸(Hyaluronic acid, HA) 水平的变化;患者治疗前后肝脏弹性值及B超结果(两组门静脉直径、脾脏厚度及脾静脉直径指标)变化;观察记录在本研究治疗过程中出现的不良反应。
1.5 疗效判定:(1)血清肝纤维化指标疗效判定:显效:治疗后4项指标中有2项相比治疗前基线值下降≥30%。有效:4项中有2项相比治疗前基线值下降20%~30%。无效:治疗结束后,未达到上述标准。(2)血清ALT指标疗效判定:显效:恢复正常。有效:ALT相比治疗前基线值下降>30%。无效:治疗结束后,未达到上述标准。(3)血清TBiL水平疗效判定:显效:血清TBiL水平恢复正常。有效:血清TBiL水平相比治疗前基线值降低>10%。无效:治疗结束后,未达到上述标准。
1.6安全性评价:观察受试者是否出现新的症状和体征(如发热、皮疹、腹痛、恶心、腹泻、食欲不振等)。血尿常规检查、心电图及肾功能等,均在治疗前后检查1次,观察记录相关情况。
1.7 统计学方法:采用spss17.0 统计软件进行有关数据分析。计数资料组间比较采用卡方检验;计量资料以均数±标准差表示,两两比较采用独立样本t检验,多组间的比较采用方差分析,检验水准为α=0.05,即P<0.05有统计学意义。
2 结果
2.1 一般资料
实验组66例,其中男性36例,女性30例,年龄30~64岁,平均(38.4±8.6)岁;对照组男性34例,女性32例,年龄32~65岁,平均(38.1±8.9)岁。两组患者治疗前在年龄、性别、体质量、基线血清ALT、AST、Alb、TBiL水平、肝纤维化指标(HA、LN、PC-Ⅲ、IV-C)、B超指标(门静脉直径、脾脏厚度、脾静脉直径)、肝硬度值等方面比较,差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05),见表l。两组患者在治疗前血尿常规、心电图、肾功能均正常。
表1 实验组和对照组治疗前一般资料对比
指标 |
实验组(n=66) |
对照组(n=66) |
统计量(t/X2值) |
P值 |
性别(男/女) |
36/30 |
34/32 |
0.122 |
0.727 |
年龄(岁) |
38.4±8.6 |
38.1±8.9 |
0.279 |
0.364 |
体重(kg) |
68.2±13.7 |
68.3±12.9 |
0.061 |
0.461 |
ALT(U/L) |
103.1±18.9 |
105.4±17.9 |
1.015 |
0.153 |
AST(U/L) |
120.8±53.2 |
119.2±48.6 |
0.255 |
0.371 |
TBiL(u mol/L |
87.3±36.2 |
86.6±34.5 |
0.161 |
0.402 |
Alb(g/L) |
34.5±7.3 |
34.6±6.8 |
0.115 |
0.421 |
HA |
390.1±101 |
382.3±99.4 |
0.632 |
0.263 |
LN |
208.6±77.3 |
204.0±78 |
0.647 |
0.257 |
PC-Ⅲ |
212.2±83.2 |
214.8±80.3 |
0.258 |
0.372 |
IV-C |
178.5±53.2 |
171.2±50.1 |
1.148 |
0.121 |
门静脉直径(mm) |
13.5±1.1 |
13.3±1.3 |
1.349 |
0.083 |
脾脏厚度(mm) |
47.5±5.3 |
46.8±5.7 |
1.034 |
0.147 |
脾静脉直径(mm) |
7.7±1.8 |
7.6±1.8 |
0.450 |
0.303 |
肝硬度值(kPa) |
13.1±2.4 |
12.9±2.3 |
0.692 |
0.227 |
2.2两组患者治疗前后临床症状的改善情况
如表2所示,两组患者在经过24周的治疗后,症状均有明显的改善,差异不存在统计学差异(P值均>0.05)。
表2 治疗前后两组患者临床症状的改善情况
组别(n) |
时间 |
乏力 |
纳差 |
腹胀 |
目黄 |
实验组(66例) |
治疗前 |
47a |
12a |
25a |
17a |
治疗后 |
4b |
2b |
2b |
0b |
|
对照组(66例) |
治疗前 |
46 |
13 |
24 |
15 |
治疗后 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
ta |
0.006 |
0.034 |
0.015 |
0.101 |
|
Pa |
0.937 |
0.854 |
0.903 |
0.751 |
|
tb |
0.000 |
0.326 |
0.193 |
0.993 |
|
Pb |
1 |
0.568 |
0.661 |
0.319 |
a:实验组和对照组治疗前对比,P均>0.05;b:指实验组和对照组与治疗后对比,P均>0.05;
2.3 两组患者治疗前后肝功能指标的比较
如表3.1和3.2所示,经过24周的治疗后,两组患者的肝功指标(ALT、AST、TBiL、Alb)值均明显的下降,和对照组相比,实验组的ALT、AST、Alb指标下降的幅度存在明显的统计学差异(t值分别为13.588,12.556,5.865,P值均<0.05);按本研究制定的肝功能改善疗效判定标准,实验组ALT水平改善的显效、有效和无效率分别为92%、8%、0%,对照组分别为84%、20%和6%,有效率为显效和有效的总和,两组相比差异有统计学意义(X2=6.186,P=0.013),提示实验组疗效显著。实验组TBiL水平改善的显效、有效和无效率分别为94%、6%、0%,对照组分别为88%、11%和1%,有效率为显效和有效的总和,两组相比差异不存在统计学意义(X2= 1.005,P=0.316)。
优于对照组;
表3.1 治疗前后两组患者肝功能指标的比较
组别(n) |
时间 |
ALT(U/L) |
AST(U/L) |
TBiL(u mol/L) |
Alb(g/L) |
实验组(66例) |
治疗前 |
103.1±18.9 |
120.8±53.2 |
87.3±36.2 |
34.5±7.3 |
治疗后 |
32.2±7.6a |
29.6±9.7a |
11.8±7.2a |
42.5±5.2a |
|
对照组(66例) |
治疗前 |
105.4±17.9 |
119.2±48.6 |
86.6±34.5 |
34.6±6.8 |
治疗后 |
48.9±11.9 |
46.3±11.8 |
11.6±7.1 |
38.6±5.6 |
|
t值 |
13.588 |
12.556 |
0.227 |
5.865 |
|
P值 |
<0.001 |
<0.001 |
0.662 |
<0.001 |
a:治疗后实验组和对照组的对比
表3.2 ALT及TBiL指标评估有效率
组别 |
ALT |
TBiL |
||||
显效(%)) |
有效(%)) |
无效(%) |