论文部分内容阅读
目的对急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者实施直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)和单纯静脉溶栓治疗的临床效果进行对比。方法选择2011年3月—2013年3月驻马店市第一人民医院收治的56例急性心肌梗死患者,随机分为观察组和对照组各28例。观察组给予直接PCI,对照组给予单纯的静脉溶栓治疗,对照两组患者的近远期治疗效果。结果观察组再通率为88.46%,住院时间为(14.80±1.37)d,对照组再通率为57.69%,住院时间(22.21±1.65)d,两组比较差异显著(P<0.05),但两组患者死亡率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对AMI患者实施PCI的血管再通率高,能够有效改善心肌缺血的状态,改善心功能,减少死亡例数,还能显著缩短住院治疗时间,预后较好,患者生命质量得到保障。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of direct percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and simple intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods From March 2011 to March 2013, 56 patients with acute myocardial infarction who were treated in Zhumadian First People’s Hospital were randomly divided into observation group (28 cases) and control group (28 cases). The observation group was given direct PCI, while the control group was treated with intravenous thrombolysis only. The short-term and long-term therapeutic effects were compared between the two groups. Results The recanalization rate of the observation group was 88.46%, the length of hospital stay was (14.80 ± 1.37) d, the rate of recanalization was 57.69% in the control group, and the length of stay was (22.21 ± 1.65) days in the observation group (P <0.05) There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusions The high recanalization rate of PCI in patients with AMI can effectively improve the status of myocardial ischemia, improve cardiac function and reduce the number of deaths. It can also significantly shorten the hospitalization time and the prognosis is good, and the quality of life of patients is protected.