论文部分内容阅读
目的 :通过对急性心肌梗塞 (AMI)非墓碑样 (对照组 )和墓碑样 (观察组 )ST段抬高临床与心电特点的分析 ,为临床治疗提供帮助。方法 :在对照组和观察组两组例数相同的情况下进行组间比较 ,观察AMI三大并发症 ,心电图∑ST、∑Q、∑QRSⅠ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ 、RV5、NQ及EPI的变化。结果 :在临床方面 ,三大并发症中心衰、心律失常、心源性休克死亡率和室颤发生率均无显著差异 ,但观察组室性心律失常、室早和室速发生率显著大于对照组。在心电方面 ,∑ST三次测定观察组均显著高于对照组 ,∑Q、NQ、RV5和EPI第三天测定值观察组显著大于对照组 ,∑QRSⅠ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ 三次测定均无显著差异。结论 :墓碑样ST段抬高提示病情严重 ,应给予积极治疗 ,但两组的最终转归并无质的区别。
OBJECTIVE: To provide clinical support for the clinical management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) non-tombstone-like (control group) and tombstone-like (observation group) ST segment elevation clinical and electrocardiographic characteristics. Methods: The changes of three major complications of AMI, ΣST, ΣQ, ΣQRSⅠ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, RV5, NQ and EPI were observed in the control group and the observation group with the same number of cases. Results: There was no significant difference in the incidence of central failure, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock and ventricular fibrillation in the three major complications. However, the incidence of ventricular arrhythmia, ventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia in the observation group was significantly greater than that in the control group. In electrocardiogram, ΣST three observation group were significantly higher than the control group, ΣQ, NQ, RV5 and EPI measured value of the third day was significantly larger than the control group observation group, ΣQRS Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ three determination no significant difference. Conclusion: The tombstone-like ST segment elevation suggests a serious condition and should be treated actively. However, there is no qualitative difference between the two groups in the final outcome.