论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较直接经皮冠脉内介入穴percutaneouscoronaryintervention熏PCI雪和静脉溶栓治疗ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死穴ST鄄segmentelevationacutemyocardialinfarction熏STEMI雪的疗效。方法:对295例STEMI患者行直接PCI穴介入组,158例雪或静脉溶栓穴溶栓组熏137例雪治疗,比较两组的梗死相关动脉开通率、左室射血分数、病死率、主要不良心脏事件发生率和平均住院时间。结果:两组基础临床特征无显著差异。与溶栓组比较,介入组穴98.6%的患者同时置入支架雪具有较高的梗死相关动脉开通率穴96.2%vs67.2%,P<0.05雪和左室射血分数眼穴63.2±12.3雪%vs穴51.4±3.4雪%,P<0.05演,且住院期间病死率穴3.2%vs5.8%,P<0.05雪、主要不良心脏事件发生率穴8.2%vs20.4%,P<0.05雪和平均住院天数眼穴10.5±7.3雪dvs穴25.5±12.7雪d,P<0.05演显著低于溶栓组。结论:与静脉溶栓比较,直接PCI治疗STEMI疗效更佳。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of direct percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with percutaneous coronary intervention for PCI and intravenous thrombolysis in ST-segmentelevationacutemyocardial infarction ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods: 295 STEMI patients underwent direct PCI and 158 patients undergoing snow or intravenous thrombolytic therapy with 137 snow smokers. The incidences of infarction-related artery turnover, left ventricular ejection fraction, and mortality were compared between the two groups. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events and average length of stay. Results: There was no significant difference in the basic clinical features between the two groups. Compared with the thrombolysis group, 98.6% of the patients in the intervention group received stenting with high infarct-related artery opening rate 96.2% vs67.2%, P <0.05 snow and left ventricular ejection fraction 63.2 ± 12.3 Snow% vs 51.4 ± 3.4% snow, P <0.05, and the mortality rate during hospitalization was 3.2% vs5.8%, P <0.05 snow, the incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 8.2% vs20.4%, P <0.05 Snow and average length of hospital stay 10.5 ± 7.3 snow dvs point 25.5 ± 12.7 snow d, P <0.05 was significantly lower than the thrombolytic group. Conclusion: Compared with intravenous thrombolysis, direct PCI STEMI better effect.