ABSTRACT
Objective::Astragalus membranaceus var. mongholicus and A. membranaceus are medicinal Astragalus, which are closely related and similar in composition, but with unclear medicinal value. Water-soluble protein profiles for A. membranaceus var. mongholicus and A. membranaceus were established to explore the differences between the two kinds of Astragalus Radix. Method::The water-soluble protein components were obtained through water ultrasonic extraction and acetone precipitation. After digested with trypsin, the obtained peptides were analyzed by nano ESI-LC-MS/MS method. Proteome Discovery 1.4 software was used to identify the proteins by comparing with the legume protein database, and the different expression water-soluble proteins were analyzed by the label-free quantitative software SIEVE. Finally, relevant information for common expression proteins, including classification, molecular function, involved biological process and signaling pathway, were analyzed by bioinformatics. Result::There were 920 and 717 specific proteins identified for A. membranaceus var. mongholicus and A. membranaceus, respectively. Totally 472 proteins were found to be co-expressed, in which 21 were differentially expressed, such as PR-10 protein, NDK-1 protein, glutelin A2, and phospholipase D. There were 14 highly expressed proteins in A. membranaceus var. mongholicus and 7 highly expressed proteins in A. membranaceus. Conclusion::There are significant differences in water-soluble protein profiles for two kinds of Astragalus Radix. Specific proteins, differentially expressed proteins and common expressed proteins can provide references for the identification of A. membranaceus var. mongholicus and A. membranaceus. It also can be used to define pharmacological mechanisms and search for drug action targets.
ABSTRACT
Objective To study the efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of acute bronchitis. Methods The 300 patients with acute bronchitis treated by our hospital from August 2016 to February 2017 were randomly divided into the control group and the experimental group, each with 150 patients. The control group was treated with penicillin and azithromycin was treated by the experimental group. Comparative analysis was made on the clinical indicators of the experimental group and the control group. Results After the corresponding treatment, the improvement time of cough sputum in the experimental group was (4.19 ± 0.54), and the improvement time was (4.32 ± 0.65). The improvement time of cough sputum in the control group was (6.29 ± 0.87), and the improvement of pharyngeal pain was (5.32 ± 0.76) days. However, the improvement time of cough expectorus and pharyngeal pain in the experimental group was significantly shorter than the control group, the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). Of the patients in the experimental group, 6 patients were not effective, 14 patients improved, 70 patients showed positive results and 60 patients recovered. In the control group, the total number of cases was 110, 15 were invalid, 25 were improved, 60 were developed and 50 were cured. However, the efficiency of the experimental group was 86.67 %, significantly higher than that in the control group (73.33 %), the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). The clinical recovery time of the patients in the experimental group was (5.65±1.19), which was significantly shorter than that of the control group (6.89±1.46), the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). Conclusion The clinical efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of acute bronchitis is better, which can significantly improve the treatment efficiency, relieve the patient’s related symptoms, and have the significance of clinical promotion.
ABSTRACT
Objective To study the efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of acute bronchitis. Methods The 300 patients with acute bronchitis treated by our hospital from August 2016 to February 2017 were randomly divided into the control group and the experimental group, each with 150 patients. The control group was treated with penicillin and azithromycin was treated by the experimental group. Comparative analysis was made on the clinical indicators of the experimental group and the control group. Results After the corresponding treatment, the improvement time of cough sputum in the experimental group was (4.19 ± 0.54), and the improvement time was (4.32 ± 0.65). The improvement time of cough sputum in the control group was (6.29 ± 0.87), and the improvement of pharyngeal pain was (5.32 ± 0.76) days. However, the improvement time of cough expectorus and pharyngeal pain in the experimental group was significantly shorter than the control group, the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). Of the patients in the experimental group, 6 patients were not effective, 14 patients improved, 70 patients showed positive results and 60 patients recovered. In the control group, the total number of cases was 110, 15 were invalid, 25 were improved, 60 were developed and 50 were cured. However, the efficiency of the experimental group was 86.67 %, significantly higher than that in the control group (73.33 %), the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). The clinical recovery time of the patients in the experimental group was (5.65±1.19), which was significantly shorter than that of the control group (6.89±1.46), the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). Conclusion The clinical efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of acute bronchitis is better, which can significantly improve the treatment efficiency, relieve the patient’s related symptoms, and have the significance of clinical promotion.