论文部分内容阅读
目的比较垂体后叶素雾化吸入与静脉滴入治疗支气管扩张咯血的应用情况。方法将2008年10月～2010年11月收治的182例支气管扩张咯血患者遵照知情同意原则随机分为观察组90例和对照组92例,对照组采用静脉滴入法治疗,观察组采用垂体后叶素雾化吸入法治疗,比较分析两组的治疗情况。结果观察组、对照组的总有效率分别为95.6%、91.3%,组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组的不良反应发生率为3.3%,明显少于12.0%,组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论垂体后叶素雾化吸入与静脉滴入治疗支气管扩张咯血的临床疗效相当,但雾化吸入的用药方法明显减少了不良反应的发生,安全性好,值得临床推广应用。
Objective To compare the application of vasopressin inhalation and intravenous infusion in the treatment of bronchiectasis hemoptysis. Methods A total of 182 patients with bronchiectasis and hemoptysis admitted from October 2008 to November 2010 were randomly divided into observation group (n = 90) and control group (n = 92) according to the principle of informed consent. The control group was treated by intravenous drip. The observation group was treated with pituitary Vasopressin inhalation therapy, comparative analysis of the two groups of treatment. Results The total effective rates of the observation group and the control group were 95.6% and 91.3% respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was 3.3% and obviously less than 12.0% The difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion The clinical efficacy of vasopressin inhalation and intravenous drip in the treatment of bronchiectasis and hemoptysis is similar, but the method of nebulized inhalation obviously reduces the occurrence of adverse reactions, which is safe and worthy of clinical application.