Bhan M K, Mahalanabis D, Fontaine O, Pierce N F
Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute for Medical Sciences, New Delhi.
Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(6):945-55.
Reviewed are all the published clinical trials of glycine-based oral rehydration salts (ORS), L-alanine-based ORS, L-glutamine-based ORS, maltodextrin-based ORS, and rice-based ORS, as well as the results of several recently completed, but unpublished, studies of these formulations that were supported by WHO. All experimental ORS formulations contained the same concentrations of salts as citrate-based WHO-ORS; all trials were randomized comparisons with WHO-ORS, and all except those with rice-based ORS were double-blind studies. The rate of stool loss and, less frequently, the duration of diarrhoea were used as indicators of clinical performance to compare ORS formulations. The following conclusions were reached concerning the efficacy and use of modified ORS formulations. Rice-based ORS (50 g/l) is superior to WHO-ORS for patients with cholera, and for such patients it can be recommended in any situation where its preparation and use are practical. Rice-based (50 g/l) and WHO-ORS solutions are equally effective for treating children with acute non-cholera diarrhoea, when feeding is resumed promptly following initial rehydration, as has been consistently recommended by WHO. Since rice-based ORS is not superior to WHO-ORS for such children, there is no apparent reason to advise a change from glucose to pre-cooked rice in the recommended formulation for WHO-ORS. Maltodextrin-based ORS formulations (50 g/l) and WHO-ORS appear to be equally effective for treating children with acute non-cholera diarrhoea; there is no reason to advise a change from glucose to maltodextrin in the recommended formulation for WHO-ORS. Amino-acid-containing ORS formulations are not recommended for either non-cholera or cholera diarrhoea, since they are more costly and have no clinical advantage over WHO-ORS for children with acute non-cholera diarrhoea or over rice-based ORS for persons with cholera.
本文回顾了所有已发表的基于甘氨酸的口服补液盐(ORS)、基于L-丙氨酸的ORS、基于L-谷氨酰胺的ORS、基于麦芽糊精的ORS和基于大米的ORS的临床试验,以及世界卫生组织支持的几项最近完成但尚未发表的关于这些配方的研究结果。所有实验性ORS配方所含盐的浓度与基于柠檬酸盐的世界卫生组织ORS相同;所有试验均为与世界卫生组织ORS的随机对照比较,除基于大米的ORS试验外,其余均为双盲研究。以粪便丢失率以及较少使用的腹泻持续时间作为临床疗效指标来比较ORS配方。关于改良ORS配方的疗效和使用得出了以下结论。基于大米的ORS(50 g/l)对霍乱患者优于世界卫生组织ORS,对于此类患者,在其制备和使用可行的任何情况下均可推荐使用。当按照世界卫生组织一贯建议在初始补液后迅速恢复喂养时,基于大米的(50 g/l)ORS溶液和世界卫生组织ORS在治疗急性非霍乱腹泻儿童方面同样有效。由于基于大米的ORS对这类儿童并不优于世界卫生组织ORS,因此没有明显理由建议在世界卫生组织ORS的推荐配方中从葡萄糖改为预煮大米。基于麦芽糊精的ORS配方(50 g/l)和世界卫生组织ORS在治疗急性非霍乱腹泻儿童方面似乎同样有效;没有理由建议在世界卫生组织ORS的推荐配方中从葡萄糖改为麦芽糊精。不推荐将含氨基酸的ORS配方用于非霍乱或霍乱腹泻,因为它们成本更高,并且对于急性非霍乱腹泻儿童而言,与世界卫生组织ORS相比没有临床优势,对于霍乱患者而言,与基于大米的ORS相比也没有临床优势。