论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨射流雾化吸入维拉帕米治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重期的临床价值及不良反应。方法34例轻、中度COPD急性加重期住院病人,分为维拉帕米组15例,万托林组19例。用氧启动的射流雾化器分别吸入上述药物,每日2次,5-7天一疗程。结果维拉帕米组治疗前后PEF自身对照有统计学意义(t=3.14,P=0.016)。万托林组治疗前后PEF自身对照有高度统计学意义(t=3.75,P=0.0045)。维拉帕米组显效0例,有效13例,无效2例;万托林组显效1例,有效18例,无效0例;两组疗效经秩和检验无统计学意义(Z=1.7626,P=0.0780)。结论轻至中度COPD急性加重期在常规治疗基础上,射流雾化吸入维拉帕米后,患者临床症状和体征得到较好改善,PEF得到明显提高,两组疗效相近但无心悸、手抖等不良反应。射流雾化吸入维拉帕米治疗COPD急性加重期特别是合并高血压、冠心病、甲亢等并发症者,有较好的应用前景。
Objective To investigate the clinical value and adverse reactions of jet atomization inhalation of verapamil in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods Thirty-four patients with mild to moderate COPD were divided into verapamil group (n = 15) and wantropin group (n = 19). Start with oxygen jet nebulizer were inhaled the above drugs, 2 times a day, 5-7 days a course of treatment. Results The PEF self-control before and after verapamil treatment was statistically significant (t = 3.14, P = 0.016). Vetoprin group before and after treatment PEF self-control was highly statistically significant (t = 3.75, P = 0.0045). The verapamil group was significantly better in 0 cases, effective in 13 cases and ineffective in 2 cases, with 1 in Wantenglin group, 18 cases in effective group and 0 ineffective group. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05) = 0.0780). Conclusion In mild to moderate COPD, on the basis of conventional treatment, after the inhalation of verapamil by jet nebulization, the clinical symptoms and signs of patients were better, PEF was significantly improved, the two groups had similar curative effect but no palpitation, trembling Other adverse reactions. Jet atomization inhalation of verapamil in the treatment of acute exacerbation of COPD, especially with hypertension, coronary heart disease, hyperthyroidism and other complications, have a good prospect.