论文部分内容阅读
目的:利用奥美拉唑与泮托拉唑对消化性溃疡出血进行治疗,对比两种药物的临床疗效。方法:选择30例消化性溃疡出血患者,利用数字表法将30例患者分为对照组与观察组,各15例,两组利用不同方式治疗,其中对照组的治疗方式为奥美拉唑40 mg+0.9%氯化钠注射液100 ml;观察组给予泮托拉唑80 mg+0.9%氯化钠注射液100 ml,对比两组患者的治疗效果及不良反应发生情况。结果:两组治疗总有效率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组止血时间短于对照组;治疗第1天、第3天观察组患者出血量明显少于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组呕血与黑便次数、平均停止出血时间明显优于对照组,观察组日平均费用明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组发生的不良反应症状都比较轻微,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:奥美拉唑与泮托拉唑对消化性溃疡出血治疗效果都较好,不良反应均不明显,泮托拉唑起效更好。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of omeprazole and pantoprazole in the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. Methods: Thirty patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were selected. Thirty patients were divided into control group and observation group by digital table method, 15 cases each. The two groups were treated by different methods, and the treatment of the control group was omeprazole 40 mg + 0.9% sodium chloride injection 100 ml; observation group was given pantoprazole 80 mg + 0.9% sodium chloride injection 100 ml, the two groups were compared the treatment effect and adverse reactions. Results: There was no significant difference in the total effective rate between the two groups (P> 0.05). The bleeding time in the observation group was shorter than that in the control group. The bleeding volume in the observation group was significantly less than that in the control group on the first day and the third day, (P <0.05). The mean hemostasis time of hematemesis and melena in the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group. The average daily cost of the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P <0.05). Adverse reactions occurred in both groups were mild symptoms, the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). Conclusion: Both omeprazole and pantoprazole are effective in treating peptic ulcer hemorrhage. Adverse reactions are not obvious, and pantoprazole is more effective.