Objective: To investigate the effect of processing Radix et Rhizoma Rhei with Salt on its anthraquinones component, so then the mechanism of processing with salt can be pointed out. Methods: Anthraquinones contents of crude Radix et Rhizoma Rhei, its processed products with dilute brine and strong brine were determined by spectrophotometry respectively. Results: There were no significant differences in anthraquinones contents among three kinds of Radix et Rhizoma Rhei. Conclusion: The processing of Radix et Rhizoma Rhei with salt doesn't affect its anthraquinones content, which suggests that the mechanism of processing with salt be worthy of discussing.

Objective: To study the feasibility of the determination paracetamol in Gangmaoqing by HPLC. Methods: The paracetamol contents of the different samples of Ganmaoqing Tablets were determined by the dead stop titration and HPLC, respectively. Results: The dead stop titration was complex and the error was larger. Whereas HPLC was simple, quick with a good seperation and small error.Conclusion: HPLC is accurate and reliable and reproducible for the determination of paracetamol in Ganmaoqing Tablets.

OBJECTIVETo measure and compare the content of d-borneol in the different parts of Cinnamomum camphora by GC-MS.

METHODWith water-steam distillation and GC-MS method, d-borneol was extracted and determined.

RESULTThe linear range of d-borneol was 0.4-2.8 microg (r = 0.999 9). The average recovery was 95.40%, and RSD was 0.56%.

CONCLUSIONThe method is simple and accurate with good separation. The content of d-borneol in the dried leaves 63.97% in the crude exfract. It can provide the proof of the exploitation of C. camphora.

Bornanes ; analysis ; Cinnamomum camphora ; chemistry ; Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry ; methods ; Plant Extracts ; analysis ; Plant Structures ; chemistry

Objective: To explore the evaluation of joint injury by HEAD-US-C (Hemophilic Early Arthropathy Detection with UltraSound in China, HEAD-US-C) in patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A treated with prophylaxis vs on-demand. Methods: The patients from June 2015 to July 2017 with moderate or severe hemophilia A were examined by ultrasound imaging of the elbows, knees and ankles; Meanwhile the HEAD-US-C ultrasound assessment scale and hemophilia joint health score scale 2.1 (HJHS2.1) were used to score the joint status. The correlation between the HEAD-US-C and HJHS score was performed in prophylaxis group and on-demand group patients, respectively. Results: A total of 925 cases of joint ultrasonography were conducted in 70 patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A. Among patients with moderate hemophilia, the median (IQR) of HEAD-US-C score and HJHS score in on-demand group were significantly higher than those in the prophylaxis group[1 (0, 6) vs 0.5 (0, 3) , z=0.177, P=0.046],[2 (0, 4) vs 2 (0, 3) z=0.375, P=0.007], even though there was no significant difference of the median (IQR) number of annualized target joints bleeding episodes between on-demand and prophylaxis groups[1 (0, 7) vs 1 (0, 5) , z=1.271, P=0.137]. Unlike in moderate cases, on-demand treatment group had more annualized target joints bleeding episodes than prophylaxis group among patients with severe hemophilia[3 (0, 8) vs 2 (0, 8) , z=0.780 P=0.037]. The prophylaxis group compared favorably with on-demand therapy group in terms of HEAD-US-C score[1 (0, 6) vs 4 (0, 7) , z=2.189, P=0.008], and HJHS score[2 (0, 5) , 4 (1, 6) , z=3646, P<0.001]for the severe hemophilia patients. The positive correlation between HEAD-US-C score and HJHS score was identified (P<0.05) , whether on-demand treatment or prophylaxis groups. The correlation coefficient between HEAD-US-C score and HJHS score in on-demand treatment and prophylaxis groups were 0.739 (95% CI 0.708-0.708) , 0.865 (95% CI 0.848-0.848) respectively, and 95% CI didn’t overlap (P<0.05) , indicating that the correlation coefficient in prophylaxis group had stronger correlation than that in on-demand group. Conclusions Clinical effects of prophylaxis were significantly better than those of on-demand treatment in patients with moderate or se-vere haemophilia A. HEAD-US-C scoring system could effectively evaluate joints damage in hemophilia A patients treated with on-demand or prophylaxis, companied by significantly positive correlation with HJHS clinical evaluation system, and provided objective index for clinical effect assessment.

Objective: To assess the feasibility of HEAD-US scale in the clinical application of hemophilic arthropathy (HA) and propose an optimized ultrasound scoring system. Methods: From July 2015 to August 2017, 1 035 joints ultrasonographic examinations were performed in 91 patients. Melchiorre, HEAD-US (Hemophilic Early Arthropathy Detection with UltraSound) and HEAD-US-C (HEAD-US in China) scale scores were used respectively to analyze the results. The correlations between three ultrasound scales and Hemophilia Joint Health Scores (HJHS) were evaluated. The sensitivity differences of the above Ultrasonic scoring systems in evaluation of HA were compared. Results: All the 91 patients were male, with median age of 16 (4-55) years old, including 86 cases of hemophilia A and 5 cases hemophilia B. The median (P₂₅, P₇₅) of Melchiorre, HEAD-US and HEAD-US-C scores of 1 035 joints were 2(0,6), 1(0,5) and 2(0,6), respectively, and the correlation coefficients compared with HJHS was 0.747, 0.762 and 0.765 respectively, with statistical significance (P<0.001). The positive rates of Melchiorre, HEAD-US-C and HEAD-US scale score were 63.0% (95%CI 59.7%-65.9%), 59.5% (95%CI 56.5%-62.4%) and 56.6% (95%CI 53.6%-59.6%) respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). Even for 336 cases of asymptomatic joints, the positive rates of Melchiorre, HEAD-US-C and HEAD-US scale score were 25.0% (95%CI 20.6%-29.6%), 17.0% (95%CI 12.6%-21.1%) and 11.9% (95%CI 8.4%-15.7%) respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). There were significant changes (P<0.05) in the ultrasonographic score of HA before and after onset of hemorrhage in 107 joints of 40 patients. The difference in variation amplitude of HEAD-US-C scores and HEAD-US scores before and after joint bleeding was statistically significant (P<0.001). Conclusion Compared with Melchiorre, there were similar good correlations between HEAD-US, HEAD-US-C and HJHS. HEAD-US ultrasound scoring system is quick, convenient and simple to use. The optimized HEAD-US-C scale score is more sensitive than HEAD-US, especially for patients with HA who have subclinical state, which make up for insufficiency of sensitivity in HEAD-US scoring system