论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较瑞替普酶与尿激酶治疗急性心肌梗死的临床效果。方法:选取我院自2008年5月～2010年3月收治150例急性心肌梗死患者随机分为观察组(瑞替普酶治疗组)和对照组(尿激酶治疗组),比较两组患者的治疗效果。结果:①观察组再通64例,未通11例,再通率为85.3%;对照组再通53例,未通22例,再通率为70.7%。两组患者比较差异显著(P<0.01),具有统计学意义。②观察组与对照组在发病后cTnT水平均呈现逐渐升高趋势,但观察组较对照组升高缓慢,具有统计学差异(P<0.05),治疗12h后差异最为明显(P<0.01)。③两组不良反应发生率比较差异显著(P<0.01),具有统计学意义。结论:瑞替普酶溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死效果更理想,且不良反应较少,值得临床推广应用。
Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of reteplase and urokinase in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Methods: A total of 150 patients with acute myocardial infarction who were admitted to our hospital from May 2008 to March 2010 were randomly divided into observation group (reteplase-treated group) and control group (urokinase-treated group), and the patients in both groups were compared treatment effect. Results: ① In the observation group, 64 cases were recanalized, 11 cases failed, and the recanalization rate was 85.3%. In the control group, 53 cases were recanalized, 22 cases failed and the recanalization rate was 70.7%. The difference between the two groups was significant (P <0.01), with statistical significance. ② The levels of cTnT in the observation group and the control group showed a gradual increase trend after onset, but the observation group increased slowly compared with the control group, with statistical difference (P <0.05). The difference was most obvious after 12 hours of treatment (P <0.01). ③ The incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups was significantly different (P <0.01), with statistical significance. Conclusion: The reteplase thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction is more effective and has fewer adverse reactions, which is worthy of clinical application.