摘要
目的比较瑞替普酶与尿激酶治疗急性心肌梗死(AMI)的效果和成本-效果比。方法选择2013年1月—2014年1月收治的AMI 60例,根据随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组30例。观察组给予瑞替普酶溶栓,对照组给予尿激酶。观察两组溶栓后临床再通率、临床再通时间及肌酸激酶(CK)、肌酸激酶同工酶(CK-MB)峰值、不良事件发生情况,并进行成本-效果分析。结果观察组溶栓后临床再通率高于对照组,临床再通时间短于对照组,CK、CK-MB峰值低于对照组,不良反应发生率低于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组成本-效果比低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论瑞替普酶治疗AMI效果好,不良事件少,且药物经济学效果最好。
Objective To compare the effect and cost-effectiveness （C/E） value between Reteplase and Uroki- nase in treatment of acute myocardial infarction （AMI）. Methods A total of 60 AMI patients admitted during January 2013 and January 2014 were divided into observation group （n = 30） and control group （n = 30） according to the random number table method. The observation group was treated with Reteplase thrombolysis, while the control group was treated with Urokinase （UK）. In the two groups, the recanalization rates after thrombolysis, reeanalization time and peak values of creatine kinase （CK） and MB isoenzyme of creatine kinase （CK-MB） , and incidence rates of adverse reaction were observed, and the C/E was analyzed. Results In the observation group after the thrombolysis, the recanalization rate was higher, the recanalization time was shorter, and the peak values of CK and CK-MB were lower, and the incidence rate of adverse reaction was lower than those in the control group （P 〈 0.05 ）. The C/E ratio in the observation group was lower than that in the control group （P 〈 0. 05）. Conclusion Reteplase in treatment of acute myocardial infarction has good curative effect, less adverse reactions and the best pharmacoeconomics effect.
出处
《解放军医药杂志》
CAS
2016年第1期90-92,共3页
Medical & Pharmaceutical Journal of Chinese People’s Liberation Army
关键词
心肌梗死
瑞替普酶
尿激酶
费用效益分析
Myocardial infarction
Reteplase
Urokinase
Cost-benefit analysis
