论文部分内容阅读
目的评价静注伊布利特与普罗帕酮转复持续时间<90d的心房颤动(房颤)的有效性及安全性。方法选择2008年6月—2010年6月,符合条件的房颤患者42例。随机进入伊布利特组(21例)和普罗帕酮组(20例)。二组分别在心电、血压监测下,同时建立静脉通路,伊布利特组首剂1mg,如无效,10min后再给予1mg;普罗帕酮组首剂70mg,如无效,10min后再给予35mg。结果伊布利特组房颤转复率为85.7%,明显高于普罗帕酮组46.7%(P<0.05)。伊布利特组发生连发室性期前收缩1例;普罗帕酮组发生低血压3例,窦性停搏1例。结论与普罗帕酮相比,伊布利特对房颤的转复有明显优势,二药虽均有不良反应但经对症治疗可好转。
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravenous amibutol and propafenone for atrial fibrillation (AF) of duration <90 days. Methods From June 2008 to June 2010, 42 patients with AF were eligible. Randomly into the ibutilide group (21 cases) and propafenone group (20 cases). Two sets of ECG, blood pressure monitoring, while the establishment of intravenous access, ibutilide group the first dose of 1mg, if invalid, 10min and then given 1mg; propafenone group, the first dose of 70mg, if invalid, then given after 10min 35mg. Results The recovery rate of atrial fibrillation in the ibutilide group was 85.7%, significantly higher than that in propafenone group (46.7%, P <0.05). 1 case had episodic ventricular contraction in the ibutilide group, 3 cases had hypotension in the propafenone group and 1 case had sinus arrest. Conclusion Compared with propafenone, ibutilide has obvious advantages in the recovery of atrial fibrillation, although the two drugs have adverse reactions, but symptomatic treatment can be improved.