欢迎访问《中国临床药理学与治疗学》杂志官方网站,今天是 分享到:

中国临床药理学与治疗学 ›› 2018, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (6): 646-652.doi: 10.12092/j.issn.1009-2501.2018.06.008

• 定量药理学 • 上一篇    下一篇

尼莫地平联合氟桂利嗪对偏头痛的疗效及安全性的Meta分析

邵姚君,郑 童,王艳秋,刘 凌,姚应水   

  1. 皖南医学院公共卫生学院,芜湖 241002,安徽
  • 收稿日期:2018-01-29 修回日期:2018-03-07 出版日期:2018-06-26 发布日期:2018-06-19
  • 通讯作者: 姚应水,男,博士,教授,硕士生导师,研究方向:慢性流行病学。 E-mail:yingshuiyao@163.com
  • 作者简介:邵姚君,男,硕士研究生,研究方向:健康心理学。
  • 基金资助:

    安徽省教育厅省级质量工程-名师工作室(2014msgzs151)

Nimodipine combined with flunarizine for preventing and treating migraine: A Meta-analysis

SHAO Yaojun, ZHENG Tong,WANG Yanqiu,LIU Ling,YAO Yingshui   

  1. Department of Preventive Medicine, Wannan Medical College, Wuhu 241002, Anhui, China
  • Received:2018-01-29 Revised:2018-03-07 Online:2018-06-26 Published:2018-06-19

摘要:

目的:系统评价尼莫地平联合氟桂利嗪治疗偏头痛的有效性和安全性。方法:通过检索PubMed、中国知网、维普以及万方数据库,根据纳入标准筛选公开发表的尼莫地平联合氟桂利嗪防治偏头痛的随机对照试验的文献,利用Jadad量表进行质量评价,并使用Review Manager 5.3软件对纳入研究进行Meta分析。结果:经过文献的质量评价后,一共纳入10篇文献,试验组423例,治疗有效例数为398例,对照组423例,治疗有效例数为324例。Meta分析表明尼莫地平联合氟桂利嗪组与单用氟桂利嗪组比较差异有统计学意义[OR=4.87,95%CI(3.07, 7.74),P<0.01],联合用药的效果比单用氟桂利嗪更好。根据剂量和疗程进行亚组分析,结果显示亚组间无异质性(I2=0),不同亚组均有治疗效果。联合用药的不良反应与单用氟桂利嗪相比差异有统计学意义[OR=0.41,95%CI(0.20,0.85),P=0.02]。试验组在治疗后头痛发作次数、持续时间、伴随症状、视觉模糊评分(VAS)等与对照组相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论:本研究表明尼莫地平联合氟桂利嗪防治偏头痛的效果优于单独使用氟桂利嗪,且安全性良好。

关键词: 尼莫地平, 氟桂利嗪, 偏头痛, Meta分析

Abstract:

AIM: To evaluate the therapy efficacy and safety of nimodipine combined with flunarizine for preventing and treating migraine. METHODS: Eligible papers about randomized controlled trials of nimodipine combined with flunarizine for preventing and treating migraine and published between 2000 and 2017 were retrieved from PubMed and from online Chinese periodicals, the full-text databases of Wan Fang, VIP and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure.J adad scale was used to assess the quality of included articles and a meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of ten papers were included finally after assessing the quality of studies. A total of 423 people were in the experimental group, in which 398 cases were effective. The control group was 423,in which 324 cases were effective. Meta-analysis showed that there was a significant difference between experimental group and control group[OR=4.87,95%CI(3.07,7.74), P<0.01]. Subgroup analysis was performed based on dose and course of treatment. The result showed that it had no heterogeneity between subgroups and different subgroups all had treatment effect. The difference of adverse effect was statistical between two groups[OR=0.41,95%CI(0.20,0.85),P=0.02]. After treatment, symptoms score evaluation of experimental group was better than the control group (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The nimodipine combined with flunarizine showed better efficacy and safety for migraine compared with flunarizine alone.

Key words: nimodipine, flunarizine, migraine, Meta-analysis

中图分类号: