论文部分内容阅读
目的通过比较早期介入和药物治疗这两种治疗手段对不稳定性心绞痛与非ST段抬高急性心肌梗死的临床疗效,进一步确定最佳的治疗方案。方法制定纳入和排除标准,在2011年3月—2012年3月收治的不稳定性心绞痛与非ST段抬高急性心肌梗死患者中按自愿原则筛选148例,将其分为早期介入治疗组和早期药物治疗组。对患者随访1~24个月后,记录心绞痛复发率、再住院率、再进行血管搭桥或者介入治疗率、发生急性心肌梗死或(和)心源性死亡的概率。结果早期介入治疗组的心绞痛复发率、再住院率、再进行血管搭桥或者介入治疗率与早期药物治疗组相比明显降低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001)。早期介入治疗组发生急性心肌梗死或(和)心源性死亡的概率明显低于早期药物治疗组。结论早期介入治疗对不稳定性心绞痛与非ST段抬高急性心肌梗死患者具有明显的临床疗效,值得临床上进一步推广使用。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of two interventions, early intervention and medical therapy, on unstable angina pectoris and non-ST elevation acute myocardial infarction, and to further determine the optimal treatment plan. Methods To establish inclusion and exclusion criteria, 148 cases of unstable angina pectoris and non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction were selected voluntarily from March 2011 to March 2012 and divided into three groups: early intervention group Early drug treatment group. Patients were followed up for 1 to 24 months, the recurrence rate of angina pectoris, rehospitalization rate, and then bypass or intervention rate, the occurrence of acute myocardial infarction or (and) the probability of cardiac death. Results The rate of recurrence of angina pectoris, rehospitalization rate, vascular bypass or intervention rate in early intervention group was significantly lower than that of early drug treatment group (P <0.001). The probability of acute myocardial infarction or (or) cardiac death in the early intervention group was significantly lower than in the early drug-treated group. Conclusion Early intervention has obvious curative effect on unstable angina pectoris and non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction patients, and it is worth to be further popularized and used clinically.