Suppr超能文献

肉毒杆菌毒素和Dysport长期治疗半面痉挛的疗效、安全性及预后预测因素

Outcome predictors, efficacy and safety of Botox and Dysport in the long-term treatment of hemifacial spasm.

作者信息

Bentivoglio A R, Fasano A, Ialongo T, Soleti F, Lo Fermo S, Albanese A

机构信息

Istituto di Neurologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia.

出版信息

Eur J Neurol. 2009 Mar;16(3):392-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2008.02507.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To review the clinical characteristics and the long-term outcome of patients with hemifacial spasm (HFS) who received botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) over the past 10 years.

RESULTS

A total of 108 patients received 665 treatments. Mean latency of clinical effect was 5.4 +/- 5.3 days for Botox and 4.9 +/- 4.6 days for Dysport (P > 0.05). Mean duration of clinical improvement was higher after the injection of Dysport than Botox: 105.9 +/- 54.2 and 85.4 +/- 41.6 days respectively (P < 0.01). The percentage of treatment failures was 6.5% for Botox and 4.6% for Dysport (P > 0.05). The doses of Botox significantly increased over time (beta = 0.35, P < 0. 001) whilst Dysport dose remained unchanged (beta = 0.16, n.s.). The duration of clinical benefit slightly increased with Botox (beta = 0.12; P < 0.01), but remained constant for Dysport. Side effects occurred in 17.4% of treatments: 16.7% of patients who had received Botox, and in 19.7% who had received Dysport (P > 0.05). The most common side effects were palpebral ptosis and lacrimation; ptosis and lagophtalmos was more common in Dysport treatments (P < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Both brands are effective and safe in treating HFS; efficacy is long-lasting. The differences in outcome and side effects confirm that, albeit the active drug is the same, Botox and Dysport should be considered as two different drugs.

摘要

背景与目的

回顾过去10年接受肉毒杆菌神经毒素(BoNT)治疗的面肌痉挛(HFS)患者的临床特征及长期预后。

结果

共108例患者接受了665次治疗。保妥适的临床起效平均潜伏期为5.4±5.3天,得保松为4.9±4.6天(P>0.05)。注射得保松后的临床改善平均持续时间高于保妥适:分别为105.9±54.2天和85.4±41.6天(P<0.01)。保妥适治疗失败率为6.5%,得保松为4.6%(P>0.05)。保妥适的剂量随时间显著增加(β=0.35,P<0.001),而得保松剂量保持不变(β=0.16,无统计学意义)。保妥适治疗的临床获益持续时间略有增加(β=0.12;P<0.01),但得保松保持不变。17.4%的治疗出现副作用:接受保妥适治疗的患者中有16.7%,接受得保松治疗的患者中有19.7%(P>0.05)。最常见的副作用是眼睑下垂和流泪;上睑下垂和兔眼在得保松治疗中更常见(P<0.005)。

结论

两种品牌在治疗HFS方面均有效且安全;疗效持久。结果和副作用的差异证实,尽管活性药物相同,但保妥适和得保松应被视为两种不同的药物。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验