摘要
目的分析超选择性动脉溶栓与静脉溶栓对老年急性脑梗死的疗效和安全性并进行对比。方法将2010～2012年就诊的63例老年急性脑梗死患者随机分成实验组与对照组,实验组31例,采用尿激酶超选择性动脉溶栓治疗;对照组32例,行静脉溶栓治疗。两组分别于溶栓前和溶栓后的30min、2h、12h、24h、3d、7d、14d按美国国立卫生院卒中评分(NIHSS)进行神经功能缺损程度评分及按欧洲脑卒中评分标准(ESS)评价治疗效果并统计治愈情况。结果治疗后实验组平均NIHSS评分为(8.7±2.3),对照组为(10.6±2.9),实验组低于对照组(P<0.05);实验组平均ESS评分为(80.79±14.26),对照组平均评分为(72.31±14.13),实验组平均ESS评分显著优于对照组(P<0.05)。结论采用尿激酶超选择性动脉溶栓与静脉溶栓都有较好的疗效和安全性,但超选择性动脉溶栓疗法优于静脉溶栓,在临床上具有推广意义。
Objective To discuss about the therapeutical effect of supperselected intraaterial thrombolysis and venous thrombolysis treating senile acute cerebral infarction and then make a comparison. Methods Pick up the patients who developed acute cerebral infarction in our from 2010 to 2012, diving them into experimental and control groups randomLy. Control group （32 cases） took the venous thrombolysis, the experimental group （31 cases） took supperselected intraaterial thrombolysis. All the patients are scored by NIHSS and ESS standard before and after their treatment. Results NIHSS score of experimental group （8.7±2.3） was significantly lower than control group （10.6±2.9） ESS score of experimental group （80.79±14.26） was better than control group （72.31±14.13）. Conclusion Supperselected intraaterial thrombolysis and venous thrombolysis are both good ways in treating senile acute cerebral infarction, but the supperselected intraaterial thrombolysis is better, providing the meaning for clinical promotion.
出处
《当代医学》
2013年第9期3-4,共2页
Contemporary Medicine
关键词
超选择性动脉溶栓
静脉溶栓
急性脑梗死
Supperselected intraaterial thrombolysis
Venous thrombolysis
Acute cerebral infarction
