中文摘要：

目的研究以化痰解郁通淋汤为主的中西医结合方法治疗急性痛风性关节炎的临床疗效和安全性。方法 133例急性痛风性关节炎患者,随机分为中西医结合组（治疗组）72例和对照组61例,两组均予以低嘌呤饮食、多饮水、禁酒、禁用利尿剂,并予碳酸氢钠及醋酸泼尼松治疗。对照组予秋水仙碱。治疗组用中药化痰解郁通淋汤,中药口服1日1剂,每周5剂,休息2日;共观察2周。治疗前后分别比较患者的临床症状与体征的变化,并取血清样本,测定血尿酸（SUA）、白细胞（WBC）总数及超敏C反应蛋白（hs-CRP）、血肌酐（SCr）、血尿素氮（BUN）、丙氨酸氨基转移酶（ALT）等实验室指标。结果治疗组总有效率为87.5%（63/72）,对照组为81.9%（50/61）,治疗组疗效优于对照组（P〈0.05）。（2）两组治疗前后中医症状体征积分比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,且治疗组优于对照组（P〈0.01）。（3）治疗后治疗组SUA、TWBC及hs-CRP等指标均明显改善。两组SUA水平均显著降低（P〈0.01）,且治疗组优于对照组（P〈0.01）;（4）在药物安全性方面,治疗组1例、对照组2例出现食欲减退、上腹部饱胀不适、恶心、呕吐,肝功能示谷丙转氨酶轻度升高,发热、皮疹等不良反应,经过对症处理后不良反应减轻,均能坚持服药。两组不良反应比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论化痰解郁通淋汤结合常规西药治疗急性痛风性关节炎有较好的疗效和安全性。

英文摘要：

Objective To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of the Comprehensive Therapy with The Phlegm-dissipating and Stagnation-resolving and Strangury-freeing Decoction treatment of Acute Gouty Arthritis. Methods The 133 cases of acute gouty arthritis were randomly divided into integrative medicine group （treatment group） 72 cases and the control group 61 cases. Both of two groups were to be low-purine diet, drinking more water, wine and diuretic were prohibited and treated by sodium bicarbonate and prednisone acetate. On the basis of symptomatic treatment, Colchicine were applied in the control group; the Phlegm-dissipating and Stagnation-resolving and Strangury-freeing Decoction were applied in the treatment group, who were given traditional Chinese medicine orally one medicament each day, 5 times a week, rested 2 days; All patients were observed for two weeks, we got the blood, before and after treatment two weeks, and detect the following indicators： score of traditional chinese medical（TCM） symptoms and signs, Serum uric acid（SUA）, total white blood cells （TWBC）, high-sensitivity C reactive protein（Hs-CRP）, Blood urea nitrogen （BUN）, Serum Creatinine（SCr） and alanine aminotransferase （ALT）. Results the total effective rate of treatment group is 87.5%, control group 81.9%, difference between the two group was significant （P〈0.05）, after treatment, the different between the two group were significantly about the integral of TCM symptoms and signs. In the treatment group, SUA, TWBC and hs-CRP were significantly decreased after treatment, difference between the two group was significant （P〈0.05, P〈0.01）. After treatment, the SUA were significantly lower （P〈0.01）, and the treatment group is better than the control group （P〈0.01）. In drug safety, the treatment group 1 and the control group 2 have some adverse reactions. Such as loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, ALT get high, fever, rash and so on, but there were no statistically significant differences ?