摘要
目的系统评价局部应用派丽奥(2%盐酸米诺环素软膏)与牙康(甲硝唑棒)比较治疗成人慢性牙周炎的临床疗效。方法计算机检索PubMed、The Cochrane Library、EMbase、CNKI、CBM和WanFang Data数据库,查找派丽奥与牙康比较治疗慢性牙周炎的随机对照试验(RCT),并追溯纳入文献的参考文献,文献检索时限均从建库至2012年7月。由2名评价员按照纳入和排除标准独立进行文献筛选、资料提取和评价纳入研究的方法学质量后,采用RevMan 5.0软件进行Meta分析。结果最终纳入7个RCT,737例受试者。Meta分析结果显示:治疗后两组在探诊深度[MD=0.26,95%CI(–0.35,0.87),P=0.40]、临床附着水平[MD=–0.10,95%CI(–0.75,0.54),P=0.75]、龈沟出血指数[MD=0.12,95%CI(–0.30,0.53),P=0.59]和菌斑指数[MD=0.07,95%CI(–0.09,0.22),P=0.41]的改变方面,差异均无统计学意义。结论现有研究证据表明,在牙周基础治疗后,局部应用派丽奥和牙康治疗慢性牙周炎的疗效无显著差异。但由于纳入研究的方法学质量均欠佳,且样本量有限,因此本系统评价结论尚需开展更多设计严谨的高质量、大样本RCT进一步验证,并尽可能延长随访时间以观察长期疗效。
Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of Periocline （2% minocycline hydrochloride oint- ment） versus Yakang （metronidazole stilus） for treating chronic periodontitis in adults by means of meta-analysis. Meth- ods The following electronic databases as PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, CBM and WanFang Data were searched on computer from inception to July, 2012, and the references of all selected studies were also retrieved to collect the relevant randomized controlled trials （RCTs） on periocline vs. Yakang for chronic periodontitis. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality of the included RCTs. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5,0 software, Results A total of 7 RCTs involving 737 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in probing depth （MD=0.26, 95%CI -0.35 to 0.87, P=0.40）, clinical attachment level （MD= -0.10, 95%CI -0,75 to 0.54, P=0.75）, sulcus bleeding index （MD=0.12, 95%CI -0.30 to 0.53, P=0.59）, and plaque index （MD=0.07, 95%CI -0.09 to 0.22, P=0.41） between the Periocline group and the Yakang group. Conclusion The current evidence shows that based on periodental non-surgical treatment, Periocline is similar to Yakang in improving the symptoms of chronic ped- odontitis in adults, However, given the low methodological quality and the limited sample size of most included studies, this conclusion still needs to be further proved by conducting more strictly-designed, high-quality and large-scale RCTs. The long-term effectiveness of those 2 treatment modalities also needs to be observed in a longer follow-up duration.
出处
《中国循证医学杂志》
CSCD
2013年第2期224-230,共7页
Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine
基金
黑龙江省博士后基金资助(编号:LBH-Z11065)
哈尔滨市科技创新人才研究专项资金项目(编号:2007RFQXS080)
关键词
米诺环素
甲硝唑
牙周炎
系统评价
META分析
随机对照试验
Minocycline
Metronidazole
Periodontitis
Systematic review
Meta-analysis
Randomized controlled trial
