论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨冠心病临界病变介入诊疗中压力导丝测定的意义。方法 84例冠心病临界病变患者,均经冠状动脉造影确诊,按诊疗方法不同随机分为对照组和观察组,各42例。对照组患者按既往经验指导,观察组患者按冠状动脉血流储备指导。比较两组病变数量、支架置入个数、住院费用及6个月主要心血管事件(MACE)。结果观察组平均置入支架(0.87±0.84)个明显少于对照组的(1.85±0.83)个,住院费用为(47505.95±21501.52)元低于对照组的(60213.35±2452.26)元,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者平均病变数量比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组再发心肌梗死、复发心绞痛、再出血运重建发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论压力导丝测定用于冠心病临界病变介入诊疗能避免不必要的支架置入,减少患者医疗开销,且不会增加不良事件,值得推广。
Objective To investigate the significance of pressure guidewire in the diagnosis and treatment of critical disease of coronary heart disease. Methods 84 patients with critical lesions of coronary heart disease were diagnosed by coronary angiography, according to different treatment methods were randomly divided into control group and observation group, 42 cases in each. Patients in the control group were guided by past experience and patients in the observation group were guided by coronary flow reserve. The number of lesions, stent placement, hospitalization costs and major cardiovascular events at 6 months (MACE) were compared. Results The average number of stents (0.87 ± 0.84) in the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group (1.85 ± 0.83), the hospitalization cost was (47505.95 ± 21501.52) yuan lower than the control group (60213.35 ± 2452.26) yuan, with statistical differences Significance (P <0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the average number of lesions (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of recurrent myocardial infarction, recurrent angina pectoris and re-effusion among the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusions The pressure guide wire used in the diagnosis and treatment of critical lesions of coronary heart disease can avoid unnecessary stenting and reduce the medical expenses of patients without increasing adverse events, which deserves promotion.