불면증에 대한 한방 족욕요법의 무작위 대조군 임상연구 현황 : CNKI를 중심으로 (Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials of Warm Herbal Foot Bath Therapy for Insomnia: A Literature Review Based on the CNKI)
-
- 대한한방내과학회지
- /
- 제44권4호
- /
- pp.726-740
- /
- 2023
목적: 이 연구의 목적은 불면증에 대한 한방 족욕요법의 연구 동향을 검토하는 것이다. 방법: 관련 연구의 수집을 위해 CNKI에서 검색을 수행하여, 2023년 8월 29일까지 발표된 연구를 검토하였다. 불면증 환자를 대상으로 한방 족욕요법과 수면제를 비교한 무작위 대조군 임상시험 만을 분석에 포함하였다. 포함된 연구들의 방법론적 질은 Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool을 사용하여 평가하였다. 메타분석의 결과는 위험비(risk ratios, RRs)와 평균차(mean differences, MDs) 및 그 95% 신뢰구간(confidence intervals, CIs)으로 제시되었다. 결과: 총 11편의 무작위 대조군 임상시험이 포함되었다. 분석 결과, 한방 족욕요법은 벤조디아제핀계 약물과 비교하여 유의하게 더 높은 총유효율(RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.36; I2=25%)과 개선된 피츠버그 수면의 질 지수(Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, PSQI) 총 점수(MD, -3.10; 95% CI, -4.24 to -1.95; I2=73%)를 보였다. 또한, 벤조디아제핀계 약물에 한방 족욕요법을 병용한 경우, 벤조디아제핀계 약물을 단독으로 사용한 것과 비교하여 유의하게 더 높은 총유효율(RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.27; I2=0%)과 개선된 PSQI 총 점수(MD, -2.23; 95% CI, -4.09 to -0.38; I2=80%)을 보였다. 네트워크 분석을 통해 한방 족욕요법에 포함된 약재를 분석하고 시각화한 결과, 4개의 클러스터가 발견되었으며, 핵심 약재는 야교등과 산조인이었다. 포함된 연구들의 방법론적 질은 전반적으로 낮았다. 결론: 이 연구는 불면증 개선에 있어서 단독요법 또는 병행치료로서의 한방 족욕요법이 효과적이라는 제한된 수준의 근거를 보여준다. 이 연구의 발견은 향후 한국에서 시행할 한방 족욕요법 연구의 기초자료로 활용될 수 있을 것이다.
목적: 여러 암 치료의 보조 및 대체요법으로서 겨우살이 추출물은 주로 유럽지역에서 이십세기 초부터 널리 사용되었고 현재 국내에서도 항암 대체 치료제로 점차 사용하는 추세이나 그 항암 기전은 아직 명확하게 밝혀져 있지 않다. 본 연구는 겨우살이 추출물이 위암에 미치는 영향을 세포주 실험을 통해 규명하였다. 대상 및 방법: 위암 세포주는 SNU-719 세포주를 사용하였고 처리한 겨우살이 추출물은 (주)한국 아브노바사로부터 제공받은 ABNOBAviscum-Q와 ABNOBAviscum-F 두 가지를 사용하였다. 겨우살이 추출물과 함께 처리한 항암제는 5-FU와 Cisplatin을 사용하였다. CCK-8 assay kit를 사용하여 세포 생존율을 측정하였고 젖산탈수소효소(LDH) assay kit로써 세포 사멸률을 측정하였다. Caspase 3 assay kit를 이용하여 세포자멸사에 관여하는 caspase 3의 활성 변화를 알아보았고 Western blot analysis를 통해 세포자멸사에 관여하는 Bcl2와 p53, 그리고 항암 작용을 하는 PTEN의 단백질 발현량을 측정하였다. 결과: 겨우살이 추출물 Q와 F를 각각 단독 처리한 실험군 보다 항암제인 5-FU와 cisplatin을 병합처리 하였을 때 세포생존율은 더 낮아졌다. Caspase 3의 활성은 겨우살이 추출물 및 항암제 5-FU 처리를 함으로써 대조군에 비해 4~6배 까지 증가하였다. Bcl2의 단백질 발현량은 대조군보다 겨우살이 추출물과 항암제 처리를 통해 감소하였고 두 약물을 함께 처리하였을 경우 더 낮아졌다. p53의 발현은 겨우살이 추출물 처리에는 영향을 받지 않았고 항암제 처리를 통해서만 증가되었다. 또한 항암 작용을 하는 PTEN의 단백질 발현 정도는 겨우살이 추출물 처리를 통해서 의미 있는 변화가 없었다. 결론: 겨우살이 추출물과 항암제인 5-FU 및 cisplatin 등을 병합 처리 할 경우 위암 세포 사멸에 있어 상승효과를 보였다. 본 연구결과에서 겨우살이 추출물의 항암효과는 caspase 3의 활성화와 Bcl2 발현의 감소를 통해 세포자멸사를 유발하며 이 세포자멸사 유도 기전은 p53과는 상관없음(p53-independent)을 알 수 있었다.
목적: 새로이 합성된 다약제내성 (MDR) 극복제인 KR-30035(KR)는 다약제내성 유전자가 과발현된 암세포에 Tc-99m MIBI의 섭취를 증가시키며, 그 효과는 verapamil과 유사하나 심혈관계에의 영향은 적다. 본 연구는 체내에서 KR의 MDR 극복효과를 평가하고자 nude mice에서 P-당단백이 발현된 세포와 발현되지 않은 세포에서 다양한 농도의 KR이 MIBI섭취에 미치는 영향에 대해 살펴보았다. 방법: P-당단백이 발현된 세포는 HCT15/CL02 대장암 세포를, P-당단백이 없는 세포로는 A549 비소세포 폐암 세포를 120마리의 생쥐에 이종이식하였다. 120 마리를 모두 6군으로 나누었다. 제 1군은 복강내로 KR을 10mg/kg의 용량으로 3차례 주입한 군이고, 제2군은 verapamil을 같은 방법으로 주입한군, 제 3군은 KR을 2회는 10 mg/kg의 용량으로 1회는 25 mg/kg의 용량으로 복강내에 주입한 군이며, 제 4군은 KR을 2회는 10 mg/kg의 용량으로 1회는 50 mg/kg의 용량으로 복강내 주입한군, 제 5군은 KR을 2회는 10 mg/kg의 용량으로 복강내에 주입하고 1회는 25 mg/kg의 용량으로 혈관내에 주입한 군이다. 그리고 제 6군은 처치하지 않은 대조군으로 하였다. 이들 각군에 Tc-99m MIBI를 주사하고 10분, 30분, 90분, 그리고 240분 후에 동물을 희생시켜서 장기와 종양 조직내의 MIBI 섭취정도를 측정하여 비교하였다. 결과: MIBI 섭취정도는 P-당단백 양성과 P-당단백 음성인 그룹 모두에서 제 2군보다 제 1군에서 높았다. 10분과 240분 사이의 배출율은 P-당단백 양성세포에서 KR을 정맥주사한 제 5군에서 MIBI 섭취가 증가하는 경향을 보였으나 그 외에는 유의한 차이가 없었다. P-당단백 양성 그룹에서 MIBI 섭취는 10분 (대조군의 173%)에서 가장 높았고 KR의 용량이 증가할수록 P-당단백 양성군 에서의 MIBI 섭취증가의 정도가 낮았다 (10분에 제 4군에서 130%, 제 5군에서 117%, 30분에 제 4군에서 178%, 제 5군에서 128%). 심장과 폐의 섭취는 제 4군과 제 5군에서 10분과 30분에서 각각 크게 증가하였다. 결론: KR은 verapamil 보다 심혈관계 작용이 적은 MDR의 억제제이며, verapamil보다 20-50배 투여량을 증가시킬 수 있으므로, 악성종양의 항암요법시 다약제내성을 극복하는데 보다 안전하고 효과가 큰 약제로 판단된다.
The wall shear stress in the vicinity of end-to end anastomoses under steady flow conditions was measured using a flush-mounted hot-film anemometer(FMHFA) probe. The experimental measurements were in good agreement with numerical results except in flow with low Reynolds numbers. The wall shear stress increased proximal to the anastomosis in flow from the Penrose tubing (simulating an artery) to the PTFE: graft. In flow from the PTFE graft to the Penrose tubing, low wall shear stress was observed distal to the anastomosis. Abnormal distributions of wall shear stress in the vicinity of the anastomosis, resulting from the compliance mismatch between the graft and the host artery, might be an important factor of ANFH formation and the graft failure. The present study suggests a correlation between regions of the low wall shear stress and the development of anastomotic neointimal fibrous hyperplasia(ANPH) in end-to-end anastomoses. 30523 T00401030523 ^x Air pressure decay(APD) rate and ultrafiltration rate(UFR) tests were performed on new and saline rinsed dialyzers as well as those roused in patients several times. C-DAK 4000 (Cordis Dow) and CF IS-11 (Baxter Travenol) reused dialyzers obtained from the dialysis clinic were used in the present study. The new dialyzers exhibited a relatively flat APD, whereas saline rinsed and reused dialyzers showed considerable amount of decay. C-DAH dialyzers had a larger APD(11.70
연구배경 및 목적: ICR계의 생쥐에 Urethane을 투여하여 발생되는 폐 병변의 형태변화를 관찰하고, 폐 샘암종으로 진행과정에서 세포증식능과 세포자멸사, 세포자멸사와 관련된 조절인자인 caspase3, 자멸사 억제인자인 survivin, 그리고 종양억제 유전자 산물인 p53 단백질이 발암과정에서 발현되는 양상을 관찰함으로써 발암과정에서의 역할을 규명하고자 하였다. 방법: Urethane을 ICR 생쥐에게 복강 내 주사를 하였고, 5주, 15주, 25주에 폐병변을 육안적으로 헤마토실린 및 에오신 염색을 관찰하였고, 면역조직화학적 방법으로 PCNA지수, 세포자멸사 지수, capase 3, survivin 및 p53의 발현을 관찰하였다. 결과: Urethane 투여 5주부터 폐의 증식이 관찰되었고, 샘종은 10주 이후부터 출현하여 시간 경과에 따라 크기와 구조적 변화가 동반되었고, 세포학적 이상소견과 더불어 주변으로 침윤성 변화가 있는 샘암종은 25주 이후에 출현하였다. 세포증식능과 세포자멸사 지수는 폐의 증식증에서는 9.6%와 0.24%, 샘종에서는 23.2%와 1.25%, 그리고 샘암종에서는 55.7%와 5.21%이었다. 따라서 세포증식능과 세포자멸사는 폐 샘암종 발생초기부터 통계적으로 유의하게 지속적으로 증가하였고, 특히 샘암종으로 진행할 경우 현저하게 증가하였다. caspase 3는 증식증에서는 15%, 샘종은 16%의 발현율을 보이는 반면, 폐샘암종은 46.7%의 발현율을 보이면서 암 단계에서 현저하게 발현이 증가하였다. Survivin 단백의 발현은 폐의 증식증, 샘종, 그리고 샘암종으로 진행할수록 발현빈도가 통계적의로 유의하게 증가하였다. p53 단백은 폐의 증식증과 샘종에서는 전혀 발현되지 않았으나 침윤성 샘암종의 일부에서 발현되었다. 이상의 결과로 생쥐의 폐샘암종 발생과정에서 세포증식능과 세포자멸사는 종양의 발생과 진행과정에서 지속적으로 관여함을 알 수 있었다. 또한 survivin 발현은 샘암종의 초기단계에서부터 지속적으로 관여하며, p53 유전자 변이는 초기보다는 암종으로 형질전환이 일어난 후에 부분적으로 발생하는 것으로 보인다. 결론: 본 연구를 통하여 PCNA와 세포자멸사 지수는 암세포로 형질전환하는 위험도를 평가하는 지표로 유용할 것으로 보이며, caspase, survivin과 p53는 urethane에 의해 유도된 생쥐 폐암 모델에서 발암과정에 중요하게 관여하는 단백질로 보인다.
가톨릭의대 강남성모병원 방사선치료실에서는 1983년 5월부터 1987년 5월 사이 수술 후 재발되거나 국소적으로 진행되어 절제 불가능한 위암환자 35예에 대하여 외부방사선치료를 실시하였다. 방사선치료는 6MV선형가속기를 사용하여 매일
Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.