Objective:To analyze the clinical efficacy of antidepressants combined with intestinal flora regulators in patients with depression.Methods:The clinical data of 92 patients with depression admitted to the Second People's Hospital of Lishui from January 2019 to December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. In the case-control study, the patients were divided into a control group ( n = 46) and an observation group ( n = 46) according to different treatment methods. The control group received treatment with escitalopram oxalate tablets, while the observation group received treatment with escitalopram oxalate tablets and bifidobacterium triple viable preparation. Both groups were treated for 2 months. The degrees of depression and anxiety, sleep quality, quality of life, levels of inflammatory factors, and the incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results:After 2 months of treatment, the scores of Hamilton Depression Scale and Hamilton Anxiety Scale in the observation group were (16.49 ± 2.96) points and (7.58 ± 1.66) points, respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the control group [(18.51 ± 3.13) points and (9.31 ± 2.01) points, t = 3.18, 4.50, P = 0.002, P < 0.001). After 4 and 8 weeks of treatment, the scores of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index in the observation group were (10.39 ± 2.30) points and (8.11 ± 1.82) points, respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the control group [(14.25 ± 2.66) points, (10.49 ± 2.07) points, t = 7.40, 5.86, both P < 0.001]. After 2 months of treatment, the total score of the Short Form-36 Health Survey in the observation group was (73.50 ± 9.16) points, which was significantly higher than that in the control group [(65.23 ± 7.29) points, t = 4.79, P < 0.001]. The levels of interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α in the observation group were (9.33 ± 2.72) ng/L and (16.71 ± 4.46) ng/L, respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the control group [(13.59 ± 4.05) ng/L, (23.20 ± 5.03) ng/L, t = 5.92, 6.55, both P < 0.001]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups ( P > 0.05). Conclusion:The combined use of antidepressants and intestinal flora regulators can obviously reduce the severity of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in patients with depression, improve their quality of life, and lower the levels of inflammatory factors, with minimal adverse reactions and high safe.

Objective:To investigate the effects of olanzapine versus risperidone on cognitive function, serum complement C3 and C4 levels and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) level in patients with schizophrenia. Methods:Eighty patients with schizophrenia who received treatment in Lishui Second People's Hospital, China between September 2018 and September 2019 were included in this study. They were randomly assigned to receive treatment either with olanzapine (olanzapine group, n = 40) or risperidone (risperidone group, n = 40). Before and after treatment, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test score were evaluated in each group. Before and after treatment, serum levels of dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine, complement C3 and C4 and hs-CRP levels were compared between the olanzapine and risperidone groups. Results:Before treatment, there were no significant differences in PANSS and WCST scores between the two groups (both P > 0.05). After treatment, PANSS score, the number of perseverative errors and the number of random errors in each group were significantly decreased compared with before treatment [olanzapine group: (56.23 ± 9.37) points, (13.06 ± 6.26) points, (16.23 ± 6.35) points, t = 12.334, 5.885, 3.840, all P < 0.05; risperidone group: (55.98 ± 10.21) points, (13.97 ± 6.54) points, (16.31 ± 6.32) points, t = 12.044, 6.213, 3.321, all P < 0.05]. After treatment, the number of correct sorts and the number of categories in each group were significantly increased compared with before treatment [olanzapine group: (29.21 ± 2.24) points, (3.79 ± 1.12) points, t = 3.323, 2.087, both P < 0.05; risperidone group: (29.33 ± 2.35) points, (3.81 ± 1.15) points, t =2.750, 2.085, both P < 0.05]. After treatment, there were significant differences in these indexes between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Before treatment, there were no significant differences in serum levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine between the two groups (all P > 0.05). After treatment, serum levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine in each group were significantly decreased compared with before treatment [olanzapine group: (5.02 ± 0.13) μg/L, (66.24 ± 6.05) μg/L, (27.32 ± 4.05) μg/L, t = 67.800, 9.977, 5.082, all P < 0.05; risperidone group: (4.18 ± 0.12) μg/L, (63.12 ± 6.21) μg/L, (24.81 ± 4.13) μg/L, t = 99.761, 12.296, 6.882, all P < 0.05]. After treatment, there were significant differences in serum levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine between the two groups ( t = 30.029, 2.276, 6.882, all P < 0.05). Before treatment, there were no significant differences in complement C3 and C4 and hs-CRP levels between the two groups (all P > 0.05). After treatment, complement C3 and C4 and hs-CRP levels in each group were significantly increased compared with before treatment [olanzapine group: (1.12 ± 0.18) g/L, (0.24 ± 0.06) g/L, (1.09 ± 0.11) mg/L, t = 5.129, 4.049, 32.452, all P < 0.05; risperidone group: (1.13 ± 0.17) g/L, (0.25 ± 0.07) g/L, (1.10 ± 0.12) mg/L, t = 5.147, 5.164, 29.227, all P < 0.05]. After treatment, there were no significant differences in complement C3 and C4 and hs-CRP levels between the two groups ( t = 0.255, 0.686, 0.389, all P > 0.05). Conclusion:Olanzapine and risperidone have the same effects on improving the mental symptoms and cognitive function of patients with schizophrenia, but risperidone has more obvious effects on improving the body function than olanzapine.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of chemical thoracic sympathetic nerve modulation combined with pulsed radiofrequency in treating upper limb postherpetic neuralgia ( PHN). Methods Forty-two patients of both sexes with upper limb PHN, aged 48-75 yr, were divided into 2 groups ( n=21 each) using a random number table method: chemical thoracic sympathetic nerve modulation combined with pulsed radiofrequency group ( TSNM+PR group) and pulsed radiofrequency group ( PR group) . TSNM+PR group was treated using chemical thoracic sympathetic nerve modulation combined with pulsed radiofrequen-cy, and PR group received pulsed radiofrequency alone. The occurrence of treatment-related adverse reac-tions was recorded. Numeric rating scale scores were recorded preoperatively and at 1 day and 1 and 3 months after operation, and the efficacy was graded. The effective treatment and pain recurrence were re-corded 3 months after operation. Quantitative sensory nerve tests were performed to record the current per-ception threshold before operation and on 1 day, 1 month and 3 months after operation. Results Compared with PR group, numeric rating scale score was significantly decreased, the therapeutic effect was en-hanced, the rate of effective treatment was increased, the recurrence rate of pain was decreased at 1 and 3 months after surgery, the current perception threshold at 250 and 5 Hz on the ipsilateral side was increased at 1 and 3 months after surgery in TSNM+PR group ( P<0. 05) . No treatment-related adverse reactions were found in two groups. Conclusion Chemical thoracic sympathetic nerve modulation combined with pulsed radiofrequency provides reliable therapeutic effect and higher safety for upper limb PHN.