摘要
目的 比较紧急经皮冠状动脉腔内成形术 (PTCA)治疗急性心肌梗死 (AMI)与尿激酶静脉溶栓治疗AMI的临床疗效及安全性。方法 在 77例AMI患者中 ,2 8例患者接受紧急PT CA治疗 ,49例患者接受尿激酶静脉溶栓治疗。结果 紧急PTCA组中梗塞相关血管开通 2 6例 ,开通率为 92 .9% ,尿激酶静脉溶栓组中梗塞相关血管再通 2 8例 ,再通率为 5 7.1% ,两组比较差异有显著性 (P <0 .0 5 )。紧急PTCA组住院期间心脏事件发生率为 7.1% ,尿激酶静脉溶栓组为2 0 .4% ,两组比较差异有显著性 (P <0 .0 5 )。紧急PTCA组住院时间为 (11.5± 4.2 )天 ,尿激酶静脉溶栓组为 (19.7± 5 .6)天 ,两组比较差异有显著性 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论 紧急PTCA与尿激酶静脉溶栓治疗AMI时 ,前者的开通梗塞相关血管及降低住院期间心脏事件发生率优于后者 ,而且住院时间明显缩短。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safty of emergent percutaneous coronary angioplasty(PTCA) with thrombolytic therapy in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction(AMI) during hospitalization .Methods Seventy seven patients with AMI underwent either emergent PTCA(28 patients) or intravenous thrombolytic therapy(49 patients).Result The recanalizing rate of infarct related artery(IRA) in patients with emergent PTCA was 92.9%(26 patients), while in those with intravenous thrombolytic therapy was 57.1%(28 patients). There were also significant differences in reducing cardiac event and shortening the hospital stay between the two groups. 7.1% vs 20.4% and 11.5± 4.2 days vs 19.7±5.6 days( P <0.05).Conclusion The emergent PTCA is superior to thrombolytic therapy for recanalizing IRA and reducing cardiac events and shortening the hospital stay after AMI.
出处
《临床内科杂志》
CAS
北大核心
2002年第4期266-267,共2页
Journal of Clinical Internal Medicine
