Bergström T, Alestig K, Thorén K, Trollfors B
J Infect. 1986 Jan;12(1):35-8. doi: 10.1016/s0163-4453(86)94833-4.
One hundred and twelve patients with acute infectious diarrhoea were entered in a double-blind randomised study in order to compare loperamide with a placebo. Of 82 evaluable patients, 38 received loperamide and 44 placebo for a maximum of 5 days. There were no significant differences in the number of loose stools during the first day of treatment, in the total number of tablets taken or in the total duration of the period of diarrhoea between the two treatment groups. The loperamide-treated patients had significantly fewer loose stools during the observation period of 5 days than did the placebo treated patients, median five vs. seven, a difference of little clinical importance. Excretion of bacterial pathogens was followed weekly in 13 of the loperamide treated patients (median 35.5 days) and in 18 of the placebo treated patients (median 22.5 days). This difference in the duration of excretion was not significant.
112例急性感染性腹泻患者进入一项双盲随机研究,以比较洛哌丁胺与安慰剂的效果。在82例可评估患者中,38例接受洛哌丁胺治疗,44例接受安慰剂治疗,最长治疗5天。两个治疗组在治疗第一天的稀便次数、服用的药片总数或腹泻总持续时间方面均无显著差异。在5天的观察期内,洛哌丁胺治疗的患者稀便次数明显少于安慰剂治疗的患者,中位数分别为5次和7次,差异无临床重要意义。对13例洛哌丁胺治疗患者(中位数35.5天)和18例安慰剂治疗患者(中位数22.5天)每周进行细菌病原体排泄情况跟踪。排泄持续时间的差异不显著。