Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Year range
1.
Chinese journal of integrative medicine ; (12): 357-361, 2017.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-287105

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To observe the effects of Xiongshao Capsule (, XSC) on anti-inflflammatory properties of high-density lipoprotein (HDL), myeloperoxidase (MPO) and paraoxonase 1 (PON1) in serum of atherosclerosis (AS) rabbit model and explore the anti-inflflammatory protective effects of XSC on HDL.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Sixty rabbits were randomized into the control, the model, XSC low-, medium- and high-dose (Rhizoma Chuanxiong + Radix Paeoniae rubra: 0.6+0.3, 1.2+0.6, 2.4+1.2g·kg·day, respectively), and simvastatin (1g·kg·day) groups. The model rabbits were fed with high-fat diet and drugs for 15 weeks. The blood and thoracic aortas samples were collected at the end of 15 weeks. The levels of serum MPO and PON1 as well as total cholesterol (TC) and free cholesterol (FC) in aorta wall cells were tested by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>TC and FC in the model group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P<0.01). Compared with the model group, TC and FC in the XSC groups were signifificantly lower (P<0.05 or P<0.01), so was simvastatin group (P<0.01). There was no signifificant difference in PON1 level between groups (P>0.05), even between model and control groups (P>0.05). The serum MPO level in the model group was signifificantly higher than that in the control group (P<0.05), which was signifificantly lower in XSC groups as well as simvastatin group (P<0.05 or P<0.01), and no difference was found between XSC groups and simvastatin group (P>0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>XSC can reduce the serum MPO level in AS rabbits to protect the anti-inflammatory function of HDL, maintaining the normal lipid transport function. TC and FC levels in aorta cells decline, and this process initiated by XSC plays an anti-AS role.</p>

2.
Chinese Journal of Surgery ; (12): 346-350, 2011.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-346307

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate and compare the efficiency and safety of laparoscopic surgery (LS) and open surgery (OS) in the treatment of colorectal carcinoma.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Randomized controlled trials on laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for colorectal carcinoma from January 2000 to October 2010 were searched in the databases of EMbase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Sciencedirect, Springer, VIP, CNKI, CBMdisc. The methodological quality was assessed according to the standard of Cochrane systematic review. For homogeneous studies, RevMan5.0 software was used for meta-analysis.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>A total of 13 RCTs involving 4603 patients were included in this study, and among those 6 were multi-center randomized controlled trials. The meta-analysis showed that: the operation time of the LS group was longer than that of the OS group (WMD = 38.91, 95%CI: 33.89 - 43.93, P < 0.001), the blood loss (WMD = -138.14, 95%CI: -195.79 - -80.50, P < 0.001) and the length of hospital stay (WMD = 2.91, 95%CI: -4.65 - -1.17, P = 0.001) of the LS group was less than those in OS group. There was no significant differences between the two groups in the number of dissected lymph nodes (WMD = -0.62, 95%CI: -1.47 - 0.23, P = 0.150). There was no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the postoperative complications (30 days) (RR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.59 - 1.01, P = 0.06). There was no significant differences between the two groups in 3-year overall survival (RR = 1.00, 95%CI: 0.96 - 1.04, P = 0.970). There was no significant differences between the two groups in 5-year overall survival (RR = 1.03, 95%CI: 0.99 - 1.08, P = 0.140). There was no significant differences between the two groups in 5-year overall recurrence (RR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.74 - 1.07, P = 0.200).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal carcinoma is a safe and effective therapy as open surgery in the short term or long term outcomes. It could be an acceptable alternative to open surgery for colorectal carcinoma.</p>


Subject(s)
Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms , General Surgery , Laparoscopy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL