乳果糖
医学
便秘
慢性便秘
荟萃分析
随机对照试验
内科学
聚乙二醇
腹痛
临床试验
胃肠病学
化学
有机化学
作者
Heather Lee-Robichaud,Kathryn Thomas,Jenna Morgan,Richard E. Nelson
出处
期刊:The Cochrane library
[Elsevier]
日期:2010-07-07
被引量:156
标识
DOI:10.1002/14651858.cd007570.pub2
摘要
Constipation is a common clinical problem. Lactulose and Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) are both commonly used osmotic laxatives that have been shown to be effective and safe treatments for chronic constipation. However, there is no definitive data as to which provides the best treatment.To identify and review all relevant data in order to determine whether Lactulose or Polyethylene Glycol is more effective at treating chronic constipation and faecal impaction.We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of lactulose and polyethylene glycol in the management of faecal impaction and chronic constipation.Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials which compared lactulose with polyethylene glycol in the management of chronic constipation.Data on study methods, participants, interventions used and outcomes measured was extracted from each study. Data was entered into the Cochrane Review Manager software (RevMan 5.0) and analysed using Cochrane MetaView.In the present meta-analysis, we considered for the first time all ten randomised controlled trials so far performed. The findings of our work indicate that Polyethylene glycol is better than lactulose in outcomes of stool frequency per week, form of stool, relief of abdominal pain and the need for additional products. On subgroup analysis, this is seen in both adults and children, except for relief of abdominal pain.Polyethylene Glycol should be used in preference to Lactulose in the treatment of Chronic Constipation.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI