• 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

氯雷他定与阿司咪唑治疗马来西亚过敏性鼻炎患者的疗效和安全性比较。

Efficacy and safety of loratadine compared with astemizole in Malaysian patients with allergic rhinitis.

作者信息

Lee S T, Amin M J

机构信息

Ear, Nose, Throat and Allergy Clinic, Mt Elizabeth Medical Centre, Singapore.

出版信息

Singapore Med J. 1994 Dec;35(6):591-4.

PMID:7761882
Abstract

Nonsedating selective peripheral H1 receptor antagonists are an important advance in antihistaminic therapy in allergic patients. This is a randomised, double-blind parallel group study comparing the use of two such agents viz loratadine 10mg daily and astemizole 10mg daily for two weeks in 39 Malaysian allergic rhinitis patients. At these dosages, both drugs were demonstrated to be efficacious (p < 0.05) for controlling nasal symptoms and safe in terms of short term biochemical and haematological changes and adverse effects noted. Evaluating efficacy criteria utilised in this study loratadine and astemizole were comparable but loratadine was significantly more effective in three areas viz: (i) in diminishing nasal symptoms after 2 weeks of treatment (p = 0.03); (ii) physician's efficacy evaluation after 2 weeks' treatment (p = 0.009); (iii) patient's efficacy evaluation after 2 weeks' treatment (p = 0.019).

摘要

非镇静性选择性外周H1受体拮抗剂是变应性疾病患者抗组胺治疗的一项重要进展。这是一项随机、双盲平行组研究,比较了两种此类药物,即每日10毫克氯雷他定和每日10毫克阿司咪唑,在39名马来西亚变应性鼻炎患者中使用两周的情况。在这些剂量下,两种药物在控制鼻部症状方面均显示有效(p<0.05),就短期生化和血液学变化以及所观察到的不良反应而言是安全的。根据本研究中使用的疗效评估标准,氯雷他定和阿司咪唑具有可比性,但氯雷他定在三个方面明显更有效,即:(i)治疗2周后减轻鼻部症状(p=0.03);(ii)治疗2周后医生的疗效评估(p=0.009);(iii)治疗2周后患者的疗效评估(p=0.019)。

相似文献

1
Efficacy and safety of loratadine compared with astemizole in Malaysian patients with allergic rhinitis.氯雷他定与阿司咪唑治疗马来西亚过敏性鼻炎患者的疗效和安全性比较。
Singapore Med J. 1994 Dec;35(6):591-4.
2
Once daily loratadine versus astemizole once daily.每日一次氯雷他定与每日一次阿司咪唑的比较。
Ann Allergy. 1994 Aug;73(2):109-13.
3
Onset of action and efficacy of terfenadine, astemizole, cetirizine, and loratadine for the relief of symptoms of allergic rhinitis.特非那定、阿司咪唑、西替利嗪和氯雷他定缓解变应性鼻炎症状的起效时间和疗效。
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1997 Aug;79(2):163-72. doi: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)63104-3.
4
A comparison of the efficacy of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray and loratadine, alone and in combination, for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.丙酸氟替卡松水性鼻喷雾剂与氯雷他定单独及联合使用治疗季节性变应性鼻炎的疗效比较。
J Fam Pract. 1998 Aug;47(2):118-25.
5
Concomitant montelukast and loratadine as treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.孟鲁司特与氯雷他定联合治疗季节性变应性鼻炎:一项随机、安慰剂对照临床试验
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2000 May;105(5):917-22. doi: 10.1067/mai.2000.106040.
6
Comparison of intranasal triamcinolone acetonide with oral loratadine in the treatment of seasonal ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis.鼻内用曲安奈德与口服氯雷他定治疗季节性豚草诱发的变应性鼻炎的比较。
Am J Manag Care. 1997 Jul;3(7):1052-8.
7
Double-blind comparison of loratadine (SCH 29851), astemizole, and placebo in hay fever with special regard to onset of action.
Ann Allergy. 1988 Dec;61(6):436-9.
8
Efficacy of loratadine versus placebo in the prophylactic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.
Ann Allergy. 1994 Sep;73(3):235-9.
9
Comparative efficacy of terfenadine, loratadine, and astemizole in perennial allergic rhinitis.特非那定、氯雷他定和阿司咪唑在常年性变应性鼻炎中的疗效比较
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998 May;118(5):668-73. doi: 10.1177/019459989811800517.
10
Comparison of loratadine and terfenadine in allergic seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis with emphasis on nasal stuffiness and peak flow.
Arzneimittelforschung. 1992 Oct;42(10):1227-31.