论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察胺碘酮治疗新发心房扑动的临床效果,提高临床治疗水平。方法:回顾性分析56例因心房扑动患者在我科住院治疗的患者,将其随机分为观察组和对照组,每组28例,两者均给予营养心肌、改善微循环、扩血管、吸氧、控制感染、纠正水电解质、酸碱平衡等基础治疗,在此基础上治疗组给予胺碘酮150mg加入生理盐水50mL中10min内静推,继续以1mg/min的速度微泵注入,持续6h,对照组给予西地兰0.4mg静推,未复律者2h后追加0.2mg,仍未复律者,6h后再追加0.2mg,观察两者的治疗效果。结果:治疗组显效11例,有效15例,无效2例,总有效率92.9%,对照组显效8例,有效13例,无效7例,总有效率75%,两者相比差异非常显著性(P<0.01),两组均无不良反应发生。结论:胺碘酮治疗心房扑动安全有效,相对于西地兰具有复律快,安全性高的优点,值得临床探讨应用。
Objective: To observe the clinical effect of amiodarone in the treatment of new-onset atrial flutter and improve the level of clinical treatment. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 56 cases of patients with atrial flutter hospitalized in our department of patients, were randomly divided into observation group and control group, 28 cases in each group, both were given nutrition myocardial, improve microcirculation, vasodilation, Oxygen inhalation, infection control, water and electrolyte, acid-base balance and other basic treatment, on the basis of the treatment group given amiodarone 150mg saline 50mL in 10min static push, continue to 1mg / min speed micro-pump infusion, sustained 6h, the control group was given cedilanid 0.4mg push, no recovery of patients after 2h additional 0.2mg, still no cardioversion, 6h and then add 0.2mg, observe the therapeutic effect of both. Results: In the treatment group, 11 cases were markedly effective, 15 cases were effective, 2 cases were ineffective and the total effective rate was 92.9%. In the control group, 8 cases were markedly effective, 13 cases were effective, 7 cases were ineffective and the total effective rate was 75%. There was significant difference between the two groups (P <0.01), no adverse reactions occurred in both groups. Conclusion: Amiodarone is safe and effective in the treatment of atrial flutter. Compared with cedilanid, it has the advantages of fast cardioversion and high safety, and is worthy of clinical application.