Quah H M, Ooi B S, Seow-Choen F, Sng K K, Ho K S
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Tech Coloproctol. 2006 Jul;10(2):111-4. doi: 10.1007/s10151-006-0262-5. Epub 2006 Jun 19.
Fibre is often recommended as the first-choice treatment but its effects can be uneven. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical efficacy and tolerability of fibre versus lactulose in outpatients with chronic constipation.
In a prospective randomized crossover trial, patients were randomized to receive fibre or lactulose for four weeks. Between treatments, patients had at least one week free of laxatives.
50 patients, of median age 50 years (range, 18-85) were recruited and 39 patients completed the trial. Compared to fibre, lactulose resulted in significantly higher mean bowel frequency (7.3, 95% CI 5.7 to 8.9 vs. 5.5, 95% CI 4.4 to 6.5; p=0.001) and stool consistency score (3.4, 95% CI 3.1 to 3.7 vs. 2.9, 95% CI 2.5 to 3.3; p=0.018). Scores for ease of evacuation were similar. The frequencies of adverse effects were not significantly different, but greater in the lactulose group. Mean patients' recorded improvement score was significantly higher after taking lactulose than fibre (6.2, 95% CI 5.5 to 7.0 vs. 4.8, 95% CI 4.0 to 5.9; p=0.017). Of the 39 patients who completed the trial, 24 (61.5%) preferred lactulose and 14 (35.9%) preferred fibre.
Lactulose had better efficacy than fibre for chronic constipation in ambulant patients, although both treatments were equally well tolerated in terms of adverse effects.
纤维常被推荐为首选治疗方法,但其效果可能参差不齐。本研究旨在比较纤维与乳果糖对慢性便秘门诊患者的临床疗效和耐受性。
在一项前瞻性随机交叉试验中,患者被随机分配接受纤维或乳果糖治疗四周。在两种治疗之间,患者至少有一周不使用泻药。
招募了50名年龄中位数为50岁(范围18 - 85岁)的患者,39名患者完成了试验。与纤维相比,乳果糖使平均排便频率显著更高(7.3,95%置信区间5.7至8.9对5.5,95%置信区间4.4至6.5;p = 0.001),且粪便稠度评分更高(3.4,95%置信区间3.1至3.7对2.9,95%置信区间2.5至3.3;p = 0.018)。排便难易程度评分相似。不良反应的发生率没有显著差异,但乳果糖组更高。患者记录的服用乳果糖后的平均改善评分显著高于纤维组(6.2,95%置信区间5.5至7.0对4.8,95%置信区间4.0至5.9;p = 0.017)。在完成试验的39名患者中,24名(61.5%)更喜欢乳果糖,14名(35.9%)更喜欢纤维。
对于门诊慢性便秘患者,乳果糖的疗效优于纤维,尽管两种治疗在不良反应方面的耐受性相当。