目的 比較多索茶堿和茶堿緩釋片對穩(wěn)定期哮喘患者的療效和安全性，為臨床用藥提供依據(jù)。方法 前瞻性入組漢中市中心醫(yī)院收治的穩(wěn)定期哮喘患者100例，隨機(jī)分為觀察組（n=50）和對照組（n=50）。觀察組給予多索茶堿400 mg，2次/d；對照組給予300 mg茶堿緩釋片，2次/d。兩組療程均為6周。觀察記錄兩組患者治療前后的肺功能指標(biāo)-1秒用力呼氣量（FEV1），用力肺活量（FVC），F(xiàn)EV1/FVC（%），最大呼氣流量（PEFR）及不良反應(yīng)。結(jié)果 治療前，兩組患者肺功能指標(biāo)（FEV1、FVC、FEV1/FVC、PEFR）均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異；治療6周后，與治療前比較，兩組患者肺功能FEV1、FEV1/FVC、PEFR均顯著提高，但觀察組和對照組患者肺功能比較沒有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異。對照組患者總不良反應(yīng)事件發(fā)生率顯著高于觀察組（P<0.05）。結(jié)論 茶堿緩釋片和多索茶堿均能改善輕度支氣管哮喘患者肺功能，但多索茶堿安全性好于茶堿緩釋片。

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of theophylline and doxofylline in treatment of stable asthma, and provide the basis for clinical medication.Methods A total of 100 patients with stable asthma in our hospital were enrolled, and they were randomly divided into observation group (n=50) and control group (n=50). The observation group was administered doxofylline 400 mg, twice a day; the control group was administered 300mg Theophylline, 2/d. The course of treatment in the two groups was six weeks. We recorded the pulmonary function indexes-forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEVI), forced vital capacity (FVC), FEV1/FVC and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), as well as side effects before and after treatment between two groups.Results Before treatment, there were no statistically significant in pulmonary function index (FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC, PEFR) between two groups. After six weeks treatment, both pulmonary function (FEV1, FEV1/FVC, PEFR) of patients in the two groups were significantly increased, but there was no statistically significant difference between two groups. The incidence of adverse events in the control group was significantly higher than in the observation group (P<0.05).Conclusions Both theophylline and doxofylline can improve lung function in patients with mild bronchial asthma, but doxofylline has a better profile in terms of safety