地屈孕酮与黄体酮注射液在先兆流产治疗中的临床效果比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (16)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (29 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the clinical effect of Didroxyprogesterone and Progesterone Injection in the treatment of threatened abortion. Methods A total of 50 cases of threatened abortion patients admitted to our hospital from January 2018 to January 2019 were selected as the research objects. According to the method of random number table,they were divided into observation group and control group, with 25 cases in each group. The observation group was treated with Didroxyprogesterone orally, while the control group was treated with Progesterone Injection. The clinical symptom relief time, hormone level, success rate of fetal protection and adverse reactions of the two groups were compared. Results The relieving time of lumbago, abdominal pain and hemostasis in the observation group were shorter than those in the control group, the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). Two weeks after treatment, the progesterone (P) and estradiol (E2) in the observation group were lower than those in the control group, and the levels of chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) were higher than those in the control group, the levels of P, E2 and HCG were lower than those in the control group at 4 weeks after treatment, with statistically significant differences (P＜0.05). The materni success rate of the observation group which was higher than that in the control group, with statistically significant difference (P＜0.05). The total incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was lower than that in the control group, with statistically significant difference (P＜0.05). Conclusion The clinical effect of Dydrogesterone on threatened abortion is better than Progesterone Injection.

Key words： Didroxyprogesterone Progesterone Injection Threatened abortion Clinical Effect

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LIANG Jing-mei
	ZHANG Dong-tao

Cite this article:

LIANG Jing-mei,ZHANG Dong-tao. Clinical effect comparison of Didroxyprogesterone and Progesterone Injection in the treatment of threatened abortion[J]. 中国当代医药, 2020, 27(19): 136-138.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2020/V27/I19/136

[1]	范丽丽，薛秀珍，张镛镛.地屈孕酮与黄体酮单药或联用治疗黄体功能不全型先兆流产的临床研究[J].药物评价研究，2017，40（3）：381-384.
[2]	戴晓菊.保胎汤配合低剂量地屈孕酮治疗黄体功能不全型先兆流产的临床观察[J].中国计划生育学杂志，2017，25（12）：851-854.
[3]	向会，刘昕，向艳.低剂量黄体酮注射液联合逍遥丸治疗先兆流产的疗效观察[J].中国计划生育学杂志，2018，26（11）：58-61.
[4]	陈影.地屈孕酮与黄体酮胶丸治疗先兆流产的临床效果对比分析[J].中国妇幼健康研究，2017，28（S3）：517-518.
[5]	刘小清，胡玉维，钟华琴.地屈孕酮治疗先兆流产的临床研究进展[J].中国医院用药评价与分析，2015，15（8）：1133-1135.
[6]	单其其格，关敬之，韩晓江.加味参芪寿胎汤治疗早期先兆流产合并亚临床甲减的临床疗效及其对外周血中HMGB1、RAGE 细胞因子的影响[J].世界中医药，2017，12（12）：2957-2960.
[7]	胡密雨.地屈孕酮联合黄体酮对先兆流产保胎成功情况、激素水平变化及疗效分析[J].四川医学，2018，39（10）：1147-1150.
[8]	谢萍.黄体酮疗法治疗先兆流产对妊娠期合并症及围生儿结局的影响[J].医学综述，2016，22（2）：356-358.
[9]	田春漫，陈波.固肾安胎丸联用黄体酮对先兆流产患者血清β-HCG，P，E2和CA125 水平的影响[J].中国中药杂志，2016，41（2）：321-325.
[10]	卢青虎，焦志彪.血清PRL、β-hCG 及CA125 联合检测预测先兆流产保胎治疗结局[J].中国计划生育学杂志，2019，27（7）：937-940，944.
[11]	张丽.黄体酮联合地屈孕酮治疗黄体功能不足性先兆流产的临床效果[J].中国计划生育学杂志，2019，27（1）：29-32.
[12]	卢培玲，靳桂香，刘伟.间苯三酚联合寿胎丸治疗妊娠12～20 周先兆流产效果观察[J].山东医药，2016，56（18）：68-69.
[13]	张肇桂，杨淑华，郑萍萍.孕康颗粒联合地屈孕酮治疗早期先兆流产的临床观察[J].中国药房，2016，27（23）：3229-3230，3231.
[14]	杜就旧，韩毓，赵海燕.盐酸利托君联合黄体酮对高龄二胎先兆流产患者血清HCG、孕酮水平及妊娠结局的影响[J].广东医学，2018，39（7）：1096-1098.
[15]	李芬霞，梁婉琪，赵宗霞.低剂量黄体酮注射液联合保胎无忧胶囊治疗先兆流产的临床效果[J].中国计划生育学杂志，2018，26（12）：1164-1167.
[16]	赵淑英.地屈孕酮与黄体酮在先兆流产中的临床效果对比分析[J].医学理论与实践，2017，30（1）：91-93.