中国当代医药
中國噹代醫藥
중국당대의약
PERSON
2014年
16期
83-84
,共2页
长春西汀%椎基底动脉%疗效
長春西汀%椎基底動脈%療效
장춘서정%추기저동맥%료효
Vinpocetine%Vertebrobasilar artery%Efficacy
目的：评价长春西汀治疗椎基底动脉供血不足(VBI)的临床效果。方法选取2011年3月~2013年12月本院收治的VBI患者87例，随机分为观察组(n=44)和对照组(n=43)，观察组采用长春西汀治疗，对照组采用盐酸地芬尼多治疗。1周后比较两组患者的临床疗效、椎动脉与基底动脉的平均血流速度。结果观察组中优25例(56.8%)，良13例(29.5%)，差6例(13.6%)，对照组中优15例(34.9%)，良12例(27.9%)，差16例(37.2%)，两组的临床疗效比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)；观察组的左椎动脉平均血流速度为(36.9±7.3)cm/s，右椎动脉为(39.1±6.3)cm/s，基底动脉为(40.1±4.9)cm/s，对照组的左椎动脉平均血流速度为(30.3±5.7)cm/s，右椎动脉为(29.5±6.3)cm/s，基底动脉为(33.8±7.0)cm/s，两组的椎动脉与基底动脉的平均血流速度比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论长春西汀治疗VBI的临床效果好，能明显增加椎基底动脉血流，值得临床予以推广。
目的：評價長春西汀治療椎基底動脈供血不足(VBI)的臨床效果。方法選取2011年3月~2013年12月本院收治的VBI患者87例，隨機分為觀察組(n=44)和對照組(n=43)，觀察組採用長春西汀治療，對照組採用鹽痠地芬尼多治療。1週後比較兩組患者的臨床療效、椎動脈與基底動脈的平均血流速度。結果觀察組中優25例(56.8%)，良13例(29.5%)，差6例(13.6%)，對照組中優15例(34.9%)，良12例(27.9%)，差16例(37.2%)，兩組的臨床療效比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)；觀察組的左椎動脈平均血流速度為(36.9±7.3)cm/s，右椎動脈為(39.1±6.3)cm/s，基底動脈為(40.1±4.9)cm/s，對照組的左椎動脈平均血流速度為(30.3±5.7)cm/s，右椎動脈為(29.5±6.3)cm/s，基底動脈為(33.8±7.0)cm/s，兩組的椎動脈與基底動脈的平均血流速度比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。結論長春西汀治療VBI的臨床效果好，能明顯增加椎基底動脈血流，值得臨床予以推廣。
목적：평개장춘서정치료추기저동맥공혈불족(VBI)적림상효과。방법선취2011년3월~2013년12월본원수치적VBI환자87례，수궤분위관찰조(n=44)화대조조(n=43)，관찰조채용장춘서정치료，대조조채용염산지분니다치료。1주후비교량조환자적림상료효、추동맥여기저동맥적평균혈류속도。결과관찰조중우25례(56.8%)，량13례(29.5%)，차6례(13.6%)，대조조중우15례(34.9%)，량12례(27.9%)，차16례(37.2%)，량조적림상료효비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)；관찰조적좌추동맥평균혈류속도위(36.9±7.3)cm/s，우추동맥위(39.1±6.3)cm/s，기저동맥위(40.1±4.9)cm/s，대조조적좌추동맥평균혈류속도위(30.3±5.7)cm/s，우추동맥위(29.5±6.3)cm/s，기저동맥위(33.8±7.0)cm/s，량조적추동맥여기저동맥적평균혈류속도비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론장춘서정치료VBI적림상효과호，능명현증가추기저동맥혈류，치득림상여이추엄。
Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of vinpocetine treating vertebrobasilar insufficient (VBI). Methods 87 patients with VBI treated in our hospital from March 2011 to December 2013 were selected and randomly divided into the observation group (n=44)and the control group (n=43).The observation group was treated with vinpocetine,while the control group was treated with hydrochloric acid difenidol.After one week,the clinical efficacy,average blood flow velocity of vertebral artery and basilar artery in the two groups were compared. Results In the observation group,25 cas-es (56.8%) were excellent,13 cases (29.5%) were good and 6 cases (13.6%) were bad,while in the control group they were 15 cases (34.9% ),12 (27.9%) and 16 (37.2%)respectively,and there was a statistical difference of clinical effect of the two grouos (P<0.05).In the observation group,the left average blood flow velocity was (36.9±7.3) cm/s,the right aver-age blood flow velocity was (39.1±6.3) cm/s,the average blood flow velocity of basilar artery was (40.1±4.9) cm/s,while they were (30.3±5.7) cm/s,( 29.5±6.3) cm/s,(33.8±7.0) cm/s respectively and there was a statistical difference of average blood flow velocity of vertebral artery and basilar artery in the two groups (P<0.05). Conclusion The clinical effect of vinpocetine treating VBI is good,it can significantly increase the blood flow of vertebrobasilar artery.It is worthy of clin-ical promotion.
