OBJECTIVETo observe the clinical effects of Qingchang Huashi Recipe (QHR) for treating active ulcerative colitis (UC) patients of inner-accumulation of damp-heat syndrome (IADHS), and to evaluate its safety.

METHODSUsing a central random system, 60 patients with mild-to-moderately initial onset or relapsed active UC of IADHS were assigned to the test group (30 cases) and the control group (30 cases). Patients in the test group took QHR (Rhizoma Coptidis 6 g, Radix Scutellariae 10 g, Radix Pulsatillae 10 g, Radix Aucklandiae 10 g, parched Radix Angelicae sinensis 10 g, Radix Paeoniae alba 20 g, Cortex Cinnamomi 3 g, Radix Glycyrrhizae 6 g, and so on), 1 dose each time, decocted twice, mixed to 300 mL, taken in two portions. The components were modified according to the condition of illness. Enema of Guanchang Recipe (GCR) was combined (Cortex Phellodendri 30 g, Radix Sophorae flavescentis 10 g, Radix Sanguisorbae 30 g, Rhizoma bletillae 9 g, Radix notoginseng 3 g, Xilei powder 1.5 g), decocted twice, mixed and concentrated to 120 mL, applied before sleep every evening, with an interval of 12 days after 12 successive days). Those in the control group took Mesalazine Enteric-coated Tablet (MECT, 0.25 g/tablet), 1 g each time, 4 times daily. The therapeutic course for all was 8 weeks. The symptom integral, the colonoscopic results, the pathological efficacy, and the remission rate were compared between the two groups. The medication safety was monitored.

RESULTSBy the end of the treatment the improvement of symptoms was superior in the test group to that of the control group (P<0.05). The colonoscopic and pathological results were improved in the two groups, but with no statistical difference (P>0.05). There was no statistical difference in the mucosal healing rate (50.0% vs 43.3%) and the remission rate (36.7% vs 30.0%) between the two groups. Only 1 patient of the control group had moderate increase of ALT during the whole test.

CONCLUSIONSQHR was effective and safe in treating active UC patients of IADHS. Besides, its effect on improving the symptoms was better than that of MECT.