期刊文献+

地佐辛联合山莨菪碱治疗输尿管结石性肾绞痛60例的临床疗效 被引量:11

Clinical efficacy of dezocine combined with anisodamine in 60 cases of ureteral calculi with renal colic
暂未订购
导出
摘要 目的探讨地佐辛联合山莨菪碱与盐酸哌替啶肌肉注射治疗输尿管结石性肾绞痛的镇痛效果和不良反应。方法将180例肾绞痛患者随机分为A、B、C组,每组60例。A组肌肉注射地佐辛5 mg,B组肌肉注射地佐辛5 mg和山莨菪碱10 mg,C组肌肉注射盐酸哌替啶100 mg。观察三组患者疼痛缓解情况及不良反应发生情况。结果用药后15、30 min,B组镇痛效果总有效率明显高于A、C组(P<0.05)。A、B组不良反应总发生率明显低于C组(P<0.05)。结论肌肉注射地佐辛联合山莨菪碱止痛效果优于单用地佐辛和盐酸哌替啶,镇痛作用快,不良反应发生率低,安全性高,值得在临床推广。 Objective To observe the analgesic effect and adverse reactions of intramuscular injection of dezocine combined with anisodamine in ureteral calculi with renal colic. Methods A total of 180 cases of patients with ureteral calculi with renal colic were randomly divided into A, B, C groups, with 60 cases in each group. Group A was given intramuscular injection of dezocine 5 mg, and group B received intramuscular injection of dezocine 5 mg and anisodamine 10 mg, while group C accepted intramuscular injection of pethidine hydrochloride 100 mg. The pain relief and adverse reactions of the three groups were observed. Results After medication for 15, 30 min, the total effective rate of analgesic effect in the group B were higher than that of the group C(P<0.05). The total inicidences of adverse reations of the group A and B were lower than that of the and group C(P<0.05). Conclusion The intramuscular injection of dezocine combined with anisodamine has better analgesic effect than that of use of with dezocine or pethidine hydrochloride, which has good analgesia, low incidence of adverse reactions and high safety. It is worth to be popularized in clinical practice.
出处 《临床医学研究与实践》 2018年第7期50-51,共2页 Clinical Research and Practice
关键词 地佐辛 山莨菪碱 盐酸哌替啶 肾绞痛 dezocine anisodamine pethidine hydrochloride renal colic
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献46

  • 1罗小敏,周炜.斯帕丰治疗肾绞痛的临床疗效[J].武汉大学学报(医学版),2006,27(6):806-808. 被引量:22
  • 2蒋宪才.泌尿系结石的中医辨证治疗[J].广西医学,2007,29(2):310-311. 被引量:8
  • 3孙西钊,叶章群.肾绞痛诊断和治疗新概念[J].临床泌尿外科杂志,2007,22(5):321-323. 被引量:151
  • 4陈新谦,金有豫,汤光.新编药物学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2011:609-621.
  • 5PARSONS J K, HERGAN L A, SAKAMOTO K, et al. Efficacy of alphablockers for the treatment of ureteral stone[J]. J Urol, 2007, 177(3) :983-987.
  • 6HOLLINGSWORTH J M, ROGERS M A, KAUF- MAN S R, et al, Medical therapy to facilitate urinary stone passage., a meta analysis[J]. Lancet, 2006, 368 (9542):1171-1179.
  • 7SIGALA S, DELLABELLA M, MILANESEG, et al. Evidence for the presence of alpha1 adrenoceptor subtypes in the human ureter[J]. Neurourol Uro- dyn, 2005, 24(2):142-148.
  • 8YILMAZ E, BATISLAM E, BASAR M M, et al. The comparison and efficacy of 3 different alldhal-ad- renergic blockers for distal ureteral stones [J]. J Urol, 2005, 173(6) :2010-2012.
  • 9ERTURHAN S, ERBAGCI A, YAGCI F, et al. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of use of tamsulo- sin and/or tolterodine for medical treatment of distal ureteral stones[J]. Urology, 2007, 69(4): 633- 636.
  • 10GRAVAS S, TZORTZIS V, KARATZAS A; et al. The use of tamsulozin as adjunctive treatment after ESWL in patients with distal ureteral stone: do we really need it? Results from a randomised study[J]. Urol Res, 2007, 35(5):231-235.

共引文献103

同被引文献147

引证文献11

二级引证文献47

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部