中国医药
中國醫藥
중국의약
CHINA MEDICINE
2012年
10期
1204-1205
,共2页
曹恂%胡文辉%夏东%翟翠端%施海玲
曹恂%鬍文輝%夏東%翟翠耑%施海玲
조순%호문휘%하동%적취단%시해령
急性心肌梗死%阿替普酶%尿激酶%临床疗效%老年患者
急性心肌梗死%阿替普酶%尿激酶%臨床療效%老年患者
급성심기경사%아체보매%뇨격매%림상료효%노년환자
Acute myocardial infarction%Alteplase%Urokinase%Clinical effect%Elderly patients
目的 探讨阿替普酶治疗老年急性心肌梗死(AMI)的临床疗效.方法 184例老年AMI患者完全随机分为对照组和观察组,各92例.2组均进行常规治疗,对照组采用尿激酶,而观察组采用阿替普酶,比较2组的临床疗效、临床症状缓解率及终点事件.结果 观察组的总有效率高于对照组[95.7％(88例)比87.0％(80例),P＜0.05],胸痛症状缓解率及再通率均高于对照组[81.5％(75例)比58.7％(54例),76.1％(70例)比60.9％(56例),均P＜0.05],再梗死、心绞痛、心力衰竭或休克发生率和病死率均低于对照组,但差异无统计学意义[分别为1.1％(1例)比3.3％(3例)、6.5％(6例)比10.9％(10例)、3.3％(3例)比7.6％(7例)、10.9％(10例)比15.2％(14例)、2.2％(2例)比6.5％(6例),P＞0.05],平均住院时间明显短于对照组[(11±4)d比(14±5)d,P＜0.05].结论 阿替普酶治疗AMI的临床疗效明显,不良反应少,值得临床推广使用.
目的 探討阿替普酶治療老年急性心肌梗死(AMI)的臨床療效.方法 184例老年AMI患者完全隨機分為對照組和觀察組,各92例.2組均進行常規治療,對照組採用尿激酶,而觀察組採用阿替普酶,比較2組的臨床療效、臨床癥狀緩解率及終點事件.結果 觀察組的總有效率高于對照組[95.7％(88例)比87.0％(80例),P＜0.05],胸痛癥狀緩解率及再通率均高于對照組[81.5％(75例)比58.7％(54例),76.1％(70例)比60.9％(56例),均P＜0.05],再梗死、心絞痛、心力衰竭或休剋髮生率和病死率均低于對照組,但差異無統計學意義[分彆為1.1％(1例)比3.3％(3例)、6.5％(6例)比10.9％(10例)、3.3％(3例)比7.6％(7例)、10.9％(10例)比15.2％(14例)、2.2％(2例)比6.5％(6例),P＞0.05],平均住院時間明顯短于對照組[(11±4)d比(14±5)d,P＜0.05].結論 阿替普酶治療AMI的臨床療效明顯,不良反應少,值得臨床推廣使用.
목적 탐토아체보매치료노년급성심기경사(AMI)적림상료효.방법 184례노년AMI환자완전수궤분위대조조화관찰조,각92례.2조균진행상규치료,대조조채용뇨격매,이관찰조채용아체보매,비교2조적림상료효、림상증상완해솔급종점사건.결과 관찰조적총유효솔고우대조조[95.7％(88례)비87.0％(80례),P＜0.05],흉통증상완해솔급재통솔균고우대조조[81.5％(75례)비58.7％(54례),76.1％(70례)비60.9％(56례),균P＜0.05],재경사、심교통、심력쇠갈혹휴극발생솔화병사솔균저우대조조,단차이무통계학의의[분별위1.1％(1례)비3.3％(3례)、6.5％(6례)비10.9％(10례)、3.3％(3례)비7.6％(7례)、10.9％(10례)비15.2％(14례)、2.2％(2례)비6.5％(6례),P＞0.05],평균주원시간명현단우대조조[(11±4)d비(14±5)d,P＜0.05].결론 아체보매치료AMI적림상료효명현,불량반응소,치득림상추엄사용.
Objective To observe the clinical outcome of alteplase treating acute myocardial infarction (AMI)in elderly patients.Methods One hundred and eighty-four cases of elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction were randomly divided into control group and observation group with 92 cases in each group.The two group received routine treatment.The control group was administrated with urokinase,while the observation group was treated with alteplase.Clinical efficacy,clinical symptom remission rate and end point were compared between two groups.Results The total efficiency of control group was 87.0％ and that of observation group was 95.7％,and the difference was statistically significant.The symptoms of chest pain remission rate and recanalization in observation group were higher than those in the control group(P ＜ 0.05); the mean duration of hospitalization in observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group(P ＜ 0.05); the end event rates were lower than those in control group,but there were not statistically significant.Conclusion Aheplase treating with AMI has curative clinical effect and few adverse reactions.
