摘要
目的对比观察瑞替普酶（r—PA）与尿激酶（UK）静脉溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死的效果和安全性。方法观察2005年以来收治的78例急性心肌梗死患者，其中尿激酶治疗组40例，瑞替普酶治疗组38例，观察溶栓再通时间、再通率、不良反应发生率、病死率等。结果r-PA组〈6h组再通率88．9％，6～12h组再通率为72．7％：UK治疗组〈6h组再通率为65．5％，6～12h组再通率为45．5％，两组比较差异有显著性意义（P〈0．05％）。两组之间的不良反应发生率和死亡率、平均住院天数均无统计学差异。结论r—PA对急性心肌梗死的溶栓效果优于UK，而其出血等不良反应发生率与UK相当，且r—PA具有给药方便的优点，是一种比较安全有效的溶栓药物。
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolytic therapy using reteplase（r-PA） to that of urokinase（UK）.Methods 78 patients with AMI in our department during 2005 to 2007, were randomized to receive either reteplase group（40cases） or urokinase group （38cases）;the recanalization rate and adverse reactions and mortality were observed. Results The recanalization rate showed obvious difference detween reteplase and urokinase （88.89% vs. 65.5%： 72.7%vs45.5%）,both the mortality and the adverse reactions showed no differences in each groups. Conclusion The efficacy of reteplase used in the treatment of acute myocardial infarctionis superior to urokinase. Reteplase is an effective and safe thrombolytic medication in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction.
出处
《国际医药卫生导报》
2008年第15期70-72,共3页
International Medicine and Health Guidance News
关键词
心肌梗死
瑞替普酶
尿激酶
静脉溶栓
Myocardial infarction Etepiase（r-PA） Urokinase（UK） Intravenous thrombolytic therapy
