CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较普罗帕酮与索他洛尔转复持续性房颤的疗效。方法2011年1月至2013年3月我院收治的持续性房颤患者50例,应用 SAS分析系统,按随机数字表法分为索他洛尔组和普罗帕酮组,每组25例。比较两组房颤转复成功率、转复时间、住院时间及复发率,左房内径、左室射血分数、心率、QT间期及不良反应。结果普罗帕酮组转复成功率显著高于索他洛尔组(P<0．05),转复时间和住院时间显著短于索他洛尔组(P<0．05),两组房颤复发率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0．05)。两组患者治疗后左室内径、左室射血分数均无明显变化(P>0．05),而心率均明显降低(P<0．05),QT间期明显延长(P<0．05)。两组左室内径、左室射血分数、心率、QT间期比较差异均无统计学意义( P>0．05)。索他洛尔组出现不良反应8例,普罗帕酮组7例,两组不良反应发生率比较差异无统计学意义( P>0．05)。结论与索他洛尔比较,普罗帕酮对持续性房颤短期大剂量应用转复成功率更高,转复时间快,是治疗持续性房颤的有效方法。
목적：비교보라파동여색타락이전복지속성방전적료효。방법2011년1월지2013년3월아원수치적지속성방전환자50례,응용 SAS분석계통,안수궤수자표법분위색타락이조화보라파동조,매조25례。비교량조방전전복성공솔、전복시간、주원시간급복발솔,좌방내경、좌실사혈분수、심솔、QT간기급불량반응。결과보라파동조전복성공솔현저고우색타락이조(P<0．05),전복시간화주원시간현저단우색타락이조(P<0．05),량조방전복발솔비교차이무통계학의의(P>0．05)。량조환자치료후좌실내경、좌실사혈분수균무명현변화(P>0．05),이심솔균명현강저(P<0．05),QT간기명현연장(P<0．05)。량조좌실내경、좌실사혈분수、심솔、QT간기비교차이균무통계학의의( P>0．05)。색타락이조출현불량반응8례,보라파동조7례,량조불량반응발생솔비교차이무통계학의의( P>0．05)。결론여색타락이비교,보라파동대지속성방전단기대제량응용전복성공솔경고,전복시간쾌,시치료지속성방전적유효방법。
Objective To compare the effect of propafenone and sotalol on persistent atrial fibrillation. Meth-ods 50 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation were collected from January 2011 to March 2013 in our hospital,all the patients were randomly divided into sotalol group and propafenone group by random number table of the SAS analy-sis system. The cardioversion success rate,cardioversion,hospitalization time and recurrence rate,left atrial diameter, left ventricular ejection fraction,heart rate,QT interval and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results The success rate of propafenone group was significantly higher than that of sotalol group (P<0. 05),the car-dioversion and hospital stay were significantly shorter than those of sotalol group (P<0. 05),there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate between the two groups (P>0. 05). After treatment,no obvious difference was ob-served in left ventricular diameter and left ventricular ejection fraction (P>0. 05),but the heart rate decreased (P<0. 05),and QT interval was significantly longer (P<0. 05). There was no significant difference in left ventricular di-ameter,left ventricular ejection fraction,heart rate,QT interval between the two groups (P>0. 05). There were 8 cases and 7 cases of adverse reactions in sotalol group and propafenone group,there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0. 05). Conclusion Short-term large dose of propafenone has better effect on cardioversion success rate and cardioversion time of persistent atrial fibrillation patients compared with sotalol, it is an effective treatment method for persistent atrial fibrillation.