系统评价区域灌注和全身给药治疗重症急性胰腺炎的效果

摘要

Objective To assess the clinical effectiveness of continuous regional arterial infusion (CRAI) and intravenous administration in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Methods The database such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, and CBM were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the establishment to July 2012, and articles about CRAI and intravenous administration in the treatment of SAP were retrieved. Studies were screened, data were extracted, and the methodological quality was assessed. Meta-analyses were conducted by using Rev-Man 5. 0 software. Results A total of 10 RCTs involving 597 patients were included. Results of Meta-analysis showed that CRAI was better than intravenous administration in the cure rates (OR=3. 42, 95%CI [2. 14, 5. 45], P<0. 00001), the rates of surgical intervention (OR=0. 39, 95%CI [0. 23, 0. 64], P=0. 0002), the secondary infection rates (OR=0. 24, 95%CI [0. 14, 0.42], P<0. 00001) and the complications morbidity rates (OR=0.28, 95%CI [0.13, 0.59], P = 0. 0009). Conclusion There are differences in the modes of administration between CARI and intravenous administration. CARI is superior to intravenous administration in the aspects of cure rate, rate of surgical intervention, secondary infection rates and complications and morbidity rates.%目的 系统评价持续性区域动脉灌注(CRAI)和全身给药治疗重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的临床疗效.方法 计算机检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMbase、CNKI、CBM,同时手工检索相关期刊和会议论文集,均从建库至2012年7月,查找关于CRAI和全身给药治疗SAP的临床对照试验研究.按照纳入与排除标准选择试验、提取资料和评价其方法质量学后,采用RevMan manager 5.0软件进行Meta分析.结果 共纳入10个研究,597例患者.Meta分析结果显示:①治愈率:两种给药方式差异有统计学意义[OR=3.42,95％CI(2.14,5.45),P＜0.00001]；②中转手术率:两种给药方式差异有统计学意义[OR=0.39,95％CI(0.23,0.64),P=0.0002];③继发感染率:两组差异有统计学意义[OR=0.24,95％CI(0.14,0.42),P＜0.00001];④并发症发生率:两种给药方式差异有统计学意义[OR=0.28,95％CI(0.13,0.59),P=0.0009].结论 CRAI和全身给药两种给药方式治疗SAP的有效性存在差异,CRAI在治愈率、中转手术率、感染发生率和并发症发生率方面更具优越性.