• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

肌腱炎和滑囊炎的治疗:尼美舒利与萘普生钠双盲平行试验对比

Treatment of tendinitis and bursitis: a comparison of nimesulide and naproxen sodium in a double-blind parallel trial.

作者信息

Lecomte J, Buyse H, Taymans J, Monti T

机构信息

Centre de Médecine et de Traumatologie Sportive, Charleroi, Belgium.

出版信息

Eur J Rheumatol Inflamm. 1994;14(4):29-32.

PMID:7601179
Abstract

The clinical efficacy and the tolerability of nimesulide (100 mg bid) and naproxen sodium (550 mg bid) in the treatment of tendinitis and bursitis were evaluated in a multicentre double-blind study over a 14-day period. Two hundred and five patients were included in the study. Patients randomised to one of two parallel treatment groups. They were clinically examined at days 1, 7 and 14. Blood analysis was performed at day 1 and at the end of the treatment. The main efficacy criterion was the diminution of pain during active mobilisation measured using a visual analogue scale. The improvement of the scores was obvious and similar between the two groups. The secondary efficacy criteria (pain during motion against resistance, functional impairment and global assessment of efficacy) confirmed these favourable results and did not evidence any statistical difference between the two groups. The side effects observed were mainly gastrointestinal. Their frequency and intensity were slightly higher in the naproxen sodium group but without any statistically significant difference (28 complaints in 16 patients in the nimesulide group and 33 complaints in 22 patients in the naproxen group). There was no statistical difference between the two treated groups regarding the general clinical examination and the biological follow-up.

摘要

在一项为期14天的多中心双盲研究中,评估了尼美舒利(100毫克,每日两次)和萘普生钠(550毫克,每日两次)治疗肌腱炎和滑囊炎的临床疗效及耐受性。该研究纳入了205例患者。患者被随机分配至两个平行治疗组之一。在第1、7和14天进行临床检查。在第1天和治疗结束时进行血液分析。主要疗效标准是使用视觉模拟量表测量主动活动时疼痛的减轻程度。两组的评分改善情况明显且相似。次要疗效标准(抗阻力运动时的疼痛、功能障碍和疗效总体评估)证实了这些良好结果,且两组之间未显示出任何统计学差异。观察到的副作用主要为胃肠道方面的。其发生率和严重程度在萘普生钠组略高,但无任何统计学显著差异(尼美舒利组16例患者有28次不适,萘普生组22例患者有33次不适)。在一般临床检查和生物学随访方面,两个治疗组之间无统计学差异。

相似文献

1
Treatment of tendinitis and bursitis: a comparison of nimesulide and naproxen sodium in a double-blind parallel trial.肌腱炎和滑囊炎的治疗:尼美舒利与萘普生钠双盲平行试验对比
Eur J Rheumatol Inflamm. 1994;14(4):29-32.
2
Celecoxib effectively treats patients with acute shoulder tendinitis/bursitis.塞来昔布可有效治疗急性肩部肌腱炎/滑囊炎患者。
J Rheumatol. 2004 Aug;31(8):1614-20.
3
Comparative efficacy and safety of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs nimesulide and diclofenac in patients with acute subdeltoid bursitis and bicipital tendinitis.非甾体抗炎药尼美舒利和双氯芬酸治疗急性肩峰下滑囊炎和肱二头肌肌腱炎患者的疗效及安全性比较
Int J Clin Pract. 1998 Apr-May;52(3):169-75.
4
Celecoxib in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea: results from two randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled, crossover studies.塞来昔布治疗原发性痛经:两项随机、双盲、活性药物与安慰剂对照的交叉研究结果
Clin Ther. 2009 Jun;31(6):1192-208. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.06.003.
5
Nimesulide in the treatment of advanced cancer pain. Double-blind comparison with naproxen.尼美舒利治疗晚期癌痛。与萘普生的双盲对照研究。
Arzneimittelforschung. 1992 Aug;42(8):1028-30.
6
Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group trial of the long-term (6-12 months) safety of acetaminophen in adult patients with osteoarthritis.对骨关节炎成年患者进行对乙酰氨基酚长期(6 - 12个月)安全性的多中心、随机、双盲、活性药物对照、平行组试验。
Clin Ther. 2006 Feb;28(2):222-35. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.02.004.
7
Double-blind study comparing the long-term efficacy of the COX-2 inhibitor nimesulide and naproxen in patients with osteoarthritis.比较COX-2抑制剂尼美舒利和萘普生对骨关节炎患者长期疗效的双盲研究。
Int J Clin Pract. 2001 Oct;55(8):510-4.
8
Double-blind study evaluating by endoscopy the tolerability of nimesulide and diclofenac on the gastric mucosa in osteoarthritic patients.
Eur J Rheumatol Inflamm. 1994;14(4):33-8.
9
Efficacy and tolerability of valdecoxib in treating the signs and symptoms of severe rheumatoid arthritis: a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.伐地考昔治疗重度类风湿关节炎体征和症状的疗效及耐受性:一项为期12周的多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究。
Clin Ther. 2007 Jun;29(6):1071-85. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.06.016.
10
The postoperative analgesic efficacy and safety of piroxicam (FDDF) and naproxen sodium.吡罗昔康(FDDF)和萘普生钠的术后镇痛效果及安全性。
Int J Clin Pharmacol Res. 1998;18(1):21-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of nimesulide/pantoprazole compared to naproxen/esomeprazole for pain relief in patients with osteoarticular diseases and dyspeptic symptoms.与萘普生/埃索美拉唑相比,尼美舒利/泮托拉唑固定剂量组合对骨关节炎疾病和消化不良症状患者缓解疼痛的疗效和安全性。
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2018 Sep 6;12:2775-2783. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S172068. eCollection 2018.
2
The clinical effect of tendon repair for tendon spontaneous rupture after corticosteroid injection in hands: A retrospective observational study.手部皮质类固醇注射后肌腱自发性断裂的肌腱修复临床效果:一项回顾性观察研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Oct;95(41):e5145. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005145.
3
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for treating lateral elbow pain in adults.
用于治疗成人外侧肘部疼痛的非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 May 31;2013(5):CD003686. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003686.pub2.
4
Short-term efficacy of rofecoxib and diclofenac in acute shoulder pain: a placebo-controlled randomized trial.罗非昔布与双氯芬酸治疗急性肩痛的短期疗效:一项安慰剂对照随机试验
PLoS Clin Trials. 2007 Mar 9;2(3):e9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pctr.0020009.
5
Patellar tendinopathy in athletes: current diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations.运动员髌腱病:当前的诊断与治疗建议
Sports Med. 2005;35(1):71-87. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200535010-00006.
6
The last "oxygenless" ascent of Mt. Everest.最后一次无氧攀登珠穆朗玛峰。
Br J Sports Med. 2001 Oct;35(5):294-6. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.35.5.294.
7
What is the most appropriate treatment for patellar tendinopathy?髌腱病最恰当的治疗方法是什么?
Br J Sports Med. 2001 Oct;35(5):291-4. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.35.5.291.