河北医学
河北醫學
하북의학
HEBEI MEDICINE
2015年
2期
278-281
,共4页
有机磷农药中毒%长托宁%阿托品%不良反应
有機燐農藥中毒%長託寧%阿託品%不良反應
유궤린농약중독%장탁저%아탁품%불량반응
AOPP%Penehyclidine hydrochloride%Atropine%Adverse reactions
目的：：探讨长托宁抢救有机磷农药中毒( AOP P )的安全有效性。方法：将120例纳入研究的AOP P 患者随机分成两组：观察组60例，应用长托宁治疗；对照组60例，应用阿托品治疗。比较两组的解毒恢复效果及不良反应。结果：观察组AOPP 患者的总有效率93.33%，对照组AOPP 患者的总有效率80.00%，观察组的疗效明显高于对照组( P<0.05)；观察组AOPP 患者的M样症状持续时间(1.70±0.45)h、N样症状持续时间(6.38±2.09)h和中枢神经系统症状持续时间(12.50±3.22)h均显著性短于对照组的(2.31±0.52)h、(10.25±4.88)h、(18.37±3.16)h(P<0.05)；观察组AOPP 患者所需的意识障碍恢复时间(23.46±11.30)h、ChE活性恢复时间(46.81±13.27)h、住院天数(7.03±2.85)d均显著性少于对照组的(40.58±12.35)h、(63.50±18.94)h、(11.52±3.06)d(P<0.05)；观察组的AOPP 患者出现心动过速、躁动、视力模糊、尿潴留等不良反应的概率均明显低于对照组( P<0.05)。结论：长托宁治疗AOP P 比阿托品更安全有效。
目的：：探討長託寧搶救有機燐農藥中毒( AOP P )的安全有效性。方法：將120例納入研究的AOP P 患者隨機分成兩組：觀察組60例，應用長託寧治療；對照組60例，應用阿託品治療。比較兩組的解毒恢複效果及不良反應。結果：觀察組AOPP 患者的總有效率93.33%，對照組AOPP 患者的總有效率80.00%，觀察組的療效明顯高于對照組( P<0.05)；觀察組AOPP 患者的M樣癥狀持續時間(1.70±0.45)h、N樣癥狀持續時間(6.38±2.09)h和中樞神經繫統癥狀持續時間(12.50±3.22)h均顯著性短于對照組的(2.31±0.52)h、(10.25±4.88)h、(18.37±3.16)h(P<0.05)；觀察組AOPP 患者所需的意識障礙恢複時間(23.46±11.30)h、ChE活性恢複時間(46.81±13.27)h、住院天數(7.03±2.85)d均顯著性少于對照組的(40.58±12.35)h、(63.50±18.94)h、(11.52±3.06)d(P<0.05)；觀察組的AOPP 患者齣現心動過速、躁動、視力模糊、尿潴留等不良反應的概率均明顯低于對照組( P<0.05)。結論：長託寧治療AOP P 比阿託品更安全有效。
목적：：탐토장탁저창구유궤린농약중독( AOP P )적안전유효성。방법：장120례납입연구적AOP P 환자수궤분성량조：관찰조60례，응용장탁저치료；대조조60례，응용아탁품치료。비교량조적해독회복효과급불량반응。결과：관찰조AOPP 환자적총유효솔93.33%，대조조AOPP 환자적총유효솔80.00%，관찰조적료효명현고우대조조( P<0.05)；관찰조AOPP 환자적M양증상지속시간(1.70±0.45)h、N양증상지속시간(6.38±2.09)h화중추신경계통증상지속시간(12.50±3.22)h균현저성단우대조조적(2.31±0.52)h、(10.25±4.88)h、(18.37±3.16)h(P<0.05)；관찰조AOPP 환자소수적의식장애회복시간(23.46±11.30)h、ChE활성회복시간(46.81±13.27)h、주원천수(7.03±2.85)d균현저성소우대조조적(40.58±12.35)h、(63.50±18.94)h、(11.52±3.06)d(P<0.05)；관찰조적AOPP 환자출현심동과속、조동、시력모호、뇨저류등불량반응적개솔균명현저우대조조( P<0.05)。결론：장탁저치료AOP P 비아탁품경안전유효。
Objective: To investigate the safety and effectiveness of penehyclidine hydrochloride in treatment of acute organophosphorus pesticide poisoning ( AOPP ) . Method: 120 cases of AOPP patients were randomly divided into two groups, observation group (n=60) and control group (n=60).The observa-tion group was given penehyclidine hydrochloride, and the control group was given atropine. The detoxifying effects and adverse reactions in 2 groups were observed and compared. Result:The total efficiency rate was 93.33% in the observation group,the total efficiency rate was 80.00% in the control group, which was was significantly higher in the observation group than the control group ( P<0.05);the muscarinic-like symptoms duration (1.70 ± 0.45) h, nicotine-like symptoms duration (6.38 ± 2.09) h , and duration of symptoms of central nervous system (12.50±3.22) h in the observation group were significantly shorter than the control group(2.31±0.52)h,(10.25±4.88)h,(18.37±3.16)h (P<0.05);the consciousness recovery time(23.46± 11.30)h, ChE activity recovery time(46.81±13.27)h and hospital stay(7.03±2.85)d in the observation group were significantly shorter than the control group(40.58±12.35)h, (63.50±18.94)h,(11.52±3.06)d ( P<0.05);the major adverse reaction rates in the observation group were lower than the control group ( P<0.05). Conclusion:Penehyclidine hydrochloride in treatment of AOPP is safer and more effective than atro-pine.
