• Journal of Ginseng Research
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.111-131
• /
• 2002

Korean ginseng (Panax ginseng C.A. Meyer) received a great deal of attention from the Orient and West as a tonic agent, health food and/or alternative herbal therapeutic agent. However, controversy with respect to scientific evidence on pharmacological effects especially, evaluation of clinical efficacy and the methodological approach still remains to be solved. Author reviewed those articles published since 1980 when pharmacodynamic studies on ginseng have intensively started. Special concern was paid on metabolic disorders including diabetes mellitus, circulatory disorders, malignant tumor, sexual dysfunction, and physical and mental performance to give clear information to those who are interested in pharmacological study of ginseng and to promote its clinical use. With respect to chronic diseases such as diabetes mellitus, atherosclerosis, high blood pressure, malignant disorders, and sexual disorders, it seems that ginseng plays preventive and restorative role rather than therapeutics. Particularly, ginseng plays a significant role in ameliorating subjective symptoms and preventing quality of life from deteriorating by long term exposure of chemical therapeutic agents. Also it seems that the potency of ginseng is mild, therefore it could be more effective when used concomitantly with conventional therapy. Clinical studies on the tonic effect of ginseng on work performance demonstrated that physical and mental dysfunction induced by various stresses are improved by increasing adaptability of physical condition. However, the results obtained from clinical studies cannot be mentioned in the indication, which are variable upon the scientist who performed those studies. In this respect, standardized ginseng product and providing planning of the systematic clinical research in double-blind randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the real efficacy for proposing ginseng indication. Pharmacological mode of action of ginseng has not yet been fully elucidated. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic researches reveal that the role of ginseng not seem to be confined to a given single organ. It has been known that ginseng plays a beneficial role in such general organs as central nervous, endocrine, metabolic, immune systems, which means ginseng improves general physical and mental conditons. Such multivalent effect of ginseng can be attributed to the main active component of ginseng,ginsenosides or non-saponin compounds which are also recently suggested to be another active ingredients. As is generally the similar case with other herbal medicines, effects of ginseng cannot be attributed as a given single compound or group of components. Diversified ingredients play synergistic or antagonistic role each other and act in harmonized manner. A few cases of adverse effect in clinical uses are reported, however, it is not observed when standardized ginseng products are used and recommended dose was administered. Unfavorable interaction with other drugs has also been suggested, which the information on the products and administered dosage are not available. However, efficacy, safety, interaction or contraindication with other medicines has to be more intensively investigated in order to promote clinical application of ginseng. For example, daily recommended doses per day are not agreement as 1-2g in the West and 3-6 g in the Orient. Duration of administration also seems variable according to the purpose. Two to three months are generally recommended to feel the benefit but time- and dose-dependent effects of ginseng still need to be solved from now on. Furthermore, the effect of ginsenosides transformed by the intestinal microflora, and differential effect associated with ginsenosides content and its composition also should be clinically evaluated in the future. In conclusion, the more wide-spread use of ginseng as a herbal medicine or nutraceutical supplement warrants the more rigorous investigations to assess its effacy and safety. In addition, a careful quality control of ginseng preparations should be done to ensure an acceptable standardization of commercial products.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.45 no.1
• /
• pp.5-19
• /
• 1998

Introduction: Direct histologic and bacteriologic examination of a representative specimen of lung tissue is the only certain method of providing an accurate diagnosis in various pulmonary diseases including diffuse pulmonary diseases. The purpose of national survey was to define the indication, incidence, effectiveness, safety and complication of open and thoracoscopic lung biopsy in korea. Methods: A multicenter registry of 37 university or general hospitals equipped more than 400 patient's bed were retrospectively collected and analyzed for 3 years from the January 1994 to December 1996 using the same registry protocol. Results: 1) There were 511 cases from the 37 hospitals during 3 years. The mean age was 50.2 years(${\pm}15.1$ years) and men was more prevalent than women(54.9% vs 45.9%). 2) The open lung biopsy was performed in 313 cases(62%) and thoracoscopic lung biopsy was performed in 192 cases(38%). The incidence of lung biopsy was more higher in diffuse lung disease(305 cases, 59.7%) than in localized lung disease(206 cases, 40.3%) 3) The duration after abnormalities was found in chest X-ray until lung biopsy was 82.4 days(open lung biopsy: 72.8 days, thoracoscopic lung biopsy: 99.4 days). The bronchoscopy was performed in 272 cases(53.2%), bronchoalveolar lavage was performed in 123 cases(24.1%) and percutaneous lung biopsy was performed in 72 cases(14.1%) before open or thoracoscopic lung biopsy. 4) There were 230 cases(45.0%) of interstitial lung disease, 133 cases(26.0%) of thoracic malignancies, 118 cases(23.1%) of infectious lung disease including tuberculosis and 30 cases (5.9 %) of other lung diseases including congenital anomalies. No significant differences were noted in diagnostic rate and disease characteristics between open lung biopsy and thoracoscopic lung biopsy. 5) The final diagnosis through an open or thoracoscopic lung biopsy was as same as the presumptive diagnosis before the biopsy in 302 cases(59.2%). The identical diagnostic rate was 66.5% in interstitial lung diseases, 58.7% in thoracic malignancies, 32.7% in lung infections, 55.1 % in pulmonary tuberculosis, 62.5% in other lung diseases including congenital anomalies. 6) One days after lung biopsy, $PaCO_2$ was increased from the prebiopsy level of $38.9{\pm}5.8mmHg$ to the $40.2{\pm}7.1mmHg$(P<0.05) and $PaO_2/FiO_2$ was decreased from the prebiopsy level of $380.3{\pm}109.3mmHg$ to the $339.2{\pm}138.2mmHg$(P=0.01). 7) There was a 10.1 % of complication after lung biopsy. The complication rate in open lung biopsy was much higher than in thoracoscopic lung biopsy(12.4% vs 5.8%, P<0.05). The incidence of complication was pneumothorax(23 cases, 4.6%), hemothorax(7 cases, 1.4%), death(6 cases, 1.2%) and others(15 cases, 2.9%). 8) The 5 cases of death due to lung biopsy were associated with open lung biopsy and one fatal case did not describe the method of lung biopsy. The underlying disease was 3 cases of thoracic malignancies(2 cases of bronchoalveolar cell cancer and one malignant mesothelioma), 2 cases of metastatic lung cancer, and one interstitial lung disease. The duration between open lung biopsy and death was $15.5{\pm}9.9$ days. 9) Despite the lung biopsy, 19 cases (3.7%) could not diagnosed. These findings were caused by biopsy was taken other than target lesion(5 cases), too small size to interpretate(3 cases), pathologic inability(11 cases). 10) The contribution of open or thoracoscopic lung biopsy to the final diagnosis was defininitely helpful(334 cases, 66.5%), moderately helpful(140 cases, 27.9%), not helpful or impossible to judge(28 cases, 5.6%). Overall, open or thoracoscopic lung biopsy were helpful to diagnose the lung lesion in 94.4 % of total cases. Conclusions: The open or thoracoscopic lung biopsy were relatively safe and reliable diagnostic method of lung lesion which could not diagnosed by other diagnostic approaches such as bronchoscopy. We recommend the thoracoscopic lung biopsy when the patients were in critical condition because the thoracoscopic biopsy was more safe and have equal diagnostic results compared with the open lung biopsy.