摘要
目的比较静脉注射胺碘酮和普罗帕酮治疗阵发性室上心动过速的临床疗效及安全性。方法将80例室上心动过速患者随机分为A、B 2组,各40例,A组给予胺碘酮注射液治疗,B组给予普罗帕酮注射液治疗,比较2组复律成功率、复律时间、不良反应及用药前后心率的变化。结果 A组复律成功率高于B组,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),而复律时间显著长于B组(P<0.01);2组治疗后心率均较治疗前显著下降(P<0.01),但治疗后A组心率显著低于B组(P<0.01)。A组不良反应发生率低于B组,但差异无统计学意义。结论胺碘酮和普罗帕酮对阵发性室上性心动过速的治疗各有利弊。普罗帕酮起效较快,适用于急性心动过速,用药需考虑不良反应;胺碘酮起效慢,但疗效好,成功率高。
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of intravenous amiodarone and hydrochloric acid propafenone in treating paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. Methods Eighty patients with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia were divieded into group A and B ran- domly （40 cases in each group）. Group A received amiodarone, while group B received hydrochloric acid propafenone. The effective rate of cardioversion, cardioversion time, adverse reactions and the heart rate change were compared. Results The effective rate in group A was higher than that in group B, but the difference was not statistically significant. The cardioversion time in group A was obviously longer than that in group B （P 〈 0.01）. The heart rates in the two groups after treatment decreased obviously （P〈0.01）, while the heart rate in group A was obviously lower than that in group B （P 〈 0.01）. The incidence of adverse reactions in group A was lower than that in group B, but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion There are advantages of both amio- darone and propafenone in the treatment of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. Propafenone is applicable to acute tachycardia, but adverse reactions should be taken into consideration. The amio- darone is effective in the treatment of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia in spite of the slow onset.
出处
《实用临床医药杂志》
CAS
2012年第19期105-106,109,共3页
Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice
关键词
胺碘酮
普罗帕酮
阵发性室上心动过速
复律
不良反应
amiodarone
propafenone
paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia
car- dioversion
adverse reactions
