1.Effects of supplemental probiotics on the changes of immunity and microecology in asthmatic children
Bin WANG ; Panpan ZHANG ; Xiangke CAO ; Qingzeng QIAN ; Haiyan LIU
Clinical Medicine of China 2018;34(2):109-114
Objective To investigate the influence of supplemental probiotics on the changes of immunity and microecology in asthmatic children. Methods One hundred and seventy?six asthmatic children treated in the Affiliated Hospital of North China University of Science and Technology from October 2015 to October 2016 were selected in the study and were randomly divided into two groups, 88 cases in each group. Patients in the control group were given routine treatment, and the observation group was treated with routine treatment combined with probiotics. The changes in immune index and microecological index before and after the treatment were compared between the two groups. Results After treatment, the observation showed CD3+ was(65. 8±2. 6)%,CD4+was(39. 2±1. 3)%,CD8+ was(24. 5±1. 0)%,CD4+/CD8+ was(1. 6±0. 2),NK cells was(15.2±0.4)%,Th1/ Th2 was(5.7±1.3),interferon γ was(56.3±1.8)ng/L,bifidobacterium was (9. 3±0. 7)lgCFU/g,lactobacillus was(9. 5±0. 6)lgCFU/g,yeast was(6. 6±0. 8)lgCFU/g,compared with those before treatment ((52. 5±1. 7)%,(23. 6±0. 8)%,(19. 7±0. 9)%,(1. 2±0. 1),(12. 8±0. 3)%,(3. 4±0. 7), (44.0±1.5)ng/L,(4.2±1.1)lgCFU/g,(4.9±0.4)lgCFU/g,(3.7±0.4)lgCFU/g),the differences were statistically significant ( t= 5. 533, 9. 957, 5. 436, 6. 332, 4. 875, 9. 764, 5. 727, 15. 143, 12. 387, 10. 837, P<0. 05). After treatment,in the control group,CD3+ was(60. 1±3. 4)%,CD4+ was(30. 7±1. 2)%,CD8+ was (21.9±1.1)%,CD4+/ CD8+ was(1.4±0.3),NK cells was(14.0±0.3)%,Th1/ Th2 was(4.6±0.9), interferon γ was ( 50. 2 ± 1. 4 ) ng/L, bifidobacterium was ( 7. 6 ± 0. 8 ) lgCFU/g, lactobacillus was ( 8. 1 ± 0. 7 ) lgCFU/g, yeast was ( 4. 9 ± 0. 8 ) lgCFU/g, compared with those before treatment ( ( 52. 4 ± 2. 0 )%, ( 23. 8 ±0. 7)%,(19. 8±0. 6)%,(1. 2±0. 2),(12. 7±0. 2)%,(3. 5±1. 1),(44. 1±1. 3)ng/L,(4. 3±0. 9)lgCFU/g, (5.0±0.5)lgCFU/g,(3.8±0.6)lgCFU/g),the differences were statistically significant(t=4.469,5.899, 4. 061,4. 667,4. 023,6. 143,4. 363,10. 674,9. 201,5. 894,P<0. 05) . The above indexes in observation group were higher than those in the control group ( t=3. 948, 3. 162, 4. 187, 4. 428, 3. 857, 5. 391, 4. 202, 5. 236, 4. 728,6. 469,P<0. 05). After treatment,the observation group showed IgE(139. 4±21. 0)was kU/L,IL?4(30. 2 ±1. 7)was ng/L,IL?10 was(6. 3±0. 8)ng/L,escherichia coli was(4. 8±0. 6)lgCFU/g,streptococcus was(6. 1 ±0.9)lgCFU/g,bacillus was(4.6±0.2)lgCFU/g,staphylococcus was(1.9±0.3)lgCFU/g,enterococcus was (5.2±0.4)lgCFU/g,compared with those before treatment((381.2±49.6)kU/L,(59.4±3.5)ng/L,(13.9 ±1.1)ng/L,(7.1±0.5)lgCFU/g,(8.4±0.6)lgCFU/g,(8.0±0.6)lgCFU/g,(4.0±0.8)lgCFU/g,(7.4 ±0. 8)lgCFU/g),while the differences were statictically significant (t=22. 231,12. 667,15. 063,7. 791,6. 770, 10. 392,16. 523,7. 232,P<0. 05). After treatment,in control group showed IgE was (230. 8±31. 7) kU/L,IL?4 was (41. 3±2. 3)ng/L,IL?10 was (9. 8±0. 7)ng/L,escherichia coli was (5. 9±0. 7)lgCFU/g,streptococcus was (7. 2±1. 0)lgCFU/g,bacillus was (6. 4±0. 8)lgCFU/g,staphylococcus was(2. 7±0. 7)lgCFU/g,enterococcus was (6.1±0.6)lgCFU/g,compared with those before treatment((387.9±54.3)kU/L,(59.6±3.4)ng/L, (13. 7±1. 2)ng/L,(7. 0±0. 4)lgCFU/g,(8. 3±0. 5)lgCFU/g,(8. 1±0. 7)lgCFU/g,(4. 1±1. 0)lgCFU/g,(7. 3 ± 0. 7 ) lgCFU/g ) , while there were significant differences ( t= 9. 826, 7. 390, 6. 979, 4. 864, 4. 527, 5. 656、8. 185,4. 967,P<0. 05). The above indexes in observation group were lower than those in the control group(t=9. 618,6. 713,8. 556,5. 290,4. 803,6. 913,7. 215,4. 731,P<0. 05) . The intestinal flora time was ( 5. 6 ± 1) d,hospitalization time was (10. 2 ± 1. 3) d,hospitalization expenses (3527. 1 ± 403. 2) RMB in the observation group,compared with (10. 7±1. 8)d,(14. 6±2. 1)d,(4689. 4±526. 7)RMB in the control group,the differences between the two groups were statistically significant ( t= 12. 107, 7. 314, 6. 295, P<0. 05 ) . Conclusion Probiotic supplement can improve immune status and microecology status in asthmatic children,which is worthy of clinical use.
2.Prevalence of hypertension in high temperature, noise operators and related factor analysis
Qingzeng QIAN ; Xiangke CAO ; Xiurong LI ; Qian WANG ; Junwang TONG ; Jun LI
Chongqing Medicine 2018;47(2):229-231,235
Objective To investigate the prevalence of hypertension in high temperature,noise operators and related factors.Methods A total of 1 263 workers from a steel enterprise were selected,among them,583 operators contacting with high temperature and noise served as the group A,267 operators only contacting with noise as the group B,249 operators only contacting with high temperature as the group C and 164 operators without contacting with high temperature and noise as group D.The prevalence of hypertension and related factors were analyzed.Results In the analysis of hypertension prevalence rate,the group D (12.8%) < group C (25.7%)< group B (34.6%)<group A(43.9%).In the analysis of blood pressure(systolic pressure/diastolic pressure),the group D[(115.8± 11.5)/(73.6±5.4) mm Hg]< group C[(124.1±10.7)/(81.9±7.3) mm Hg]< group B[(132.9±11.3)/(86.7±5.2) rnm Hg]< group A [(143.7 ± 12.8)/(92.4 ± 6.5) mm Hg].The onset age of hypertension in the group A was earlier than that in the group B,C,D (P<0.05).The lower educational level,the more working years,the bigger body mass index(BMI),themore smoking and drinking were,the higher the hypertension prevalence rate was.Hypertension had significantly negative correlation with the educational level and significantly positive correlation with age,working years,BMI,smoking and drinking (P< 0.05).Conclusion The prevalence of hypertension in high temperature and noise operators is related to personal constitution and living habits.
3.Consensus for the management of severe acute respiratory syndrome.
Nanshang ZHONG ; Yanqing DING ; Yuanli MAO ; Qian WANG ; Guangfa WANG ; Dewen WANG ; Yulong CONG ; Qun LI ; Youning LIU ; Li RUAN ; Baoyuan CHEN ; Xiangke DU ; Yonghong YANG ; Zheng ZHANG ; Xuezhe ZHANG ; Jiangtao LIN ; Jie ZHENG ; Qingyu ZHU ; Daxin NI ; Xiuming XI ; Guang ZENG ; Daqing MA ; Chen WANG ; Wei WANG ; Beining WANG ; Jianwei WANG ; Dawei LIU ; Xingwang LI ; Xiaoqing LIU ; Jie CHEN ; Rongchang CHEN ; Fuyuan MIN ; Peiying YANG ; Yuanchun ZHANG ; Huiming LUO ; Zhenwei LANG ; Yonghua HU ; Anping NI ; Wuchun CAO ; Jie LEI ; Shuchen WANG ; Yuguang WANG ; Xioalin TONG ; Weisheng LIU ; Min ZHU ; Yunling ZHANG ; Zhongde ZHANG ; Xiaomei ZHANG ; Xuihui LI ; Wei CHEN ; Xuihua XHEN ; Lin LIN ; Yunjian LUO ; Jiaxi ZHONG ; Weilang WENG ; Shengquan PENG ; Zhiheng PAN ; Yongyan WANG ; Rongbing WANG ; Junling ZUO ; Baoyan LIU ; Ning ZHANG ; Junping ZHANG ; Binghou ZHANG ; Zengying ZHANG ; Weidong WANG ; Lixin CHEN ; Pingan ZHOU ; Yi LUO ; Liangduo JIANG ; Enxiang CHAO ; Liping GUO ; Xuechun TAN ; Junhui PAN ; null ; null
Chinese Medical Journal 2003;116(11):1603-1635