The Journal of dermatological treatment · 2002
Levothyroxine versus ketotifen in the treatment of patients with chronic urticaria and thyroid autoimmunity.
Контролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karaayvaz M, Calişkaner Z, Turan M, Akar A, Oztürk S, Ozangüç N
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Thyroid hormone replacement therapy has previously been discussed as a feasible therapeutic approach in patients with chronic urticaria and/or angio-oedema (CUA) and thyroid autoimmunity (TA).
OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of levothyroxine was investigated in patients with CUA and TA by comparing it with ketotifen treatment.
METHODS: A total of 60 patients with CUA and TA were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups, which were matched with respect to sex, age and symptom score. Each group consisted of 30 patients. Patients in one group were treated with ketotifen and the other with levothyroxine. After completion of the treatment periods, the pre- and post-treatment symptom scores, onset time of drug effects, duration of symptom-free period, recurrence ratios, recurrence times and side effects were evaluated for each drug. The two drugs were compared with each other according to these parameters.
RESULTS: Ketotifen treatment provided significant relief of symptoms. However, these beneficial effects were observed only in ongoing treatment. Symptoms reappeared in all patients during the drug-free follow-up period. On the other hand, 18 of 30 patients were completely improved and three patients partially improved with levothyroxine treatment. Symptoms did not recur in the completely improved patients.
CONCLUSION: Levothyroxine is an important and inexpensive treatment alternative in patients with CUA and TA.
OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of levothyroxine was investigated in patients with CUA and TA by comparing it with ketotifen treatment.
METHODS: A total of 60 patients with CUA and TA were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups, which were matched with respect to sex, age and symptom score. Each group consisted of 30 patients. Patients in one group were treated with ketotifen and the other with levothyroxine. After completion of the treatment periods, the pre- and post-treatment symptom scores, onset time of drug effects, duration of symptom-free period, recurrence ratios, recurrence times and side effects were evaluated for each drug. The two drugs were compared with each other according to these parameters.
RESULTS: Ketotifen treatment provided significant relief of symptoms. However, these beneficial effects were observed only in ongoing treatment. Symptoms reappeared in all patients during the drug-free follow-up period. On the other hand, 18 of 30 patients were completely improved and three patients partially improved with levothyroxine treatment. Symptoms did not recur in the completely improved patients.
CONCLUSION: Levothyroxine is an important and inexpensive treatment alternative in patients with CUA and TA.