Български
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Journal of Pediatrics 2012-Oct

A randomized, prospective, comparison study of a mixture of acacia fiber, psyllium fiber, and fructose vs polyethylene glycol 3350 with electrolytes for the treatment of chronic functional constipation in childhood.

Само регистрирани потребители могат да превеждат статии
Вход / Регистрация
Линкът е запазен в клипборда
Paolo Quitadamo
Paola Coccorullo
Eleonora Giannetti
Claudio Romano
Andrea Chiaro
Angelo Campanozzi
Emanuela Poli
Salvatore Cucchiara
Giovanni Di Nardo
Annamaria Staiano

Ключови думи

Резюме

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of a mixture of acacia fiber, psyllium fiber, and fructose (AFPFF) with polyethylene glycol 3350 combined with electrolytes (PEG+E) in the treatment of children with chronic functional constipation (CFC); and to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of AFPFF in the treatment of children with CFC.

METHODS

This was a randomized, open label, prospective, controlled, parallel-group study involving 100 children (M/F: 38/62; mean age ± SD: 6.5 ± 2.7 years) who were diagnosed with CFC according to the Rome III Criteria. Children were randomly divided into 2 groups: 50 children received AFPFF (16.8 g daily) and 50 children received PEG+E (0.5 g/kg daily) for 8 weeks. Primary outcome measures were frequency of bowel movements, stool consistency, fecal incontinence, and improvement of other associated gastrointestinal symptoms. Safety was assessed with evaluation of clinical adverse effects and growth measurements.

RESULTS

Compliance rates were 72% for AFPFF and 96% for PEG+E. A significant improvement of constipation was seen in both groups. After 8 weeks, 77.8% of children treated with AFPFF and 83% of children treated with PEG+E had improved (P = .788). Neither PEG+E nor AFPFF caused any clinically significant side effects during the entire course of the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized study, we did not find any significant difference between the efficacy of AFPFF and PEG+E in the treatment of children with CFC. Both medications were proved to be safe for CFC treatment, but PEG+E was better accepted by children.

Присъединете се към нашата
страница във facebook

Най-пълната база данни за лечебни билки, подкрепена от науката

  • Работи на 55 езика
  • Билкови лекове, подкрепени от науката
  • Разпознаване на билки по изображение
  • Интерактивна GPS карта - маркирайте билките на място (очаквайте скоро)
  • Прочетете научни публикации, свързани с вашето търсене
  • Търсете лечебни билки по техните ефекти
  • Организирайте вашите интереси и бъдете в крак с научните статии, клиничните изследвания и патентите

Въведете симптом или болест и прочетете за билките, които биха могли да помогнат, напишете билка и вижте болестите и симптомите, срещу които се използва.
* Цялата информация се базира на публикувани научни изследвания

Google Play badgeApp Store badge