摘要
目的:对比不同给药途径下尼莫地平在蛛网膜下腔出血(Subarachnoid hemorrhage,SAH)脑血管痉挛(Cerebral angiospasm,CVS)上的不同防治效果。方法:择取2014年5月—2016年5月期间由笔者所在医院收治的80例SAH患者,全部使用尼莫地平进行SAH后CVS的防治,按照给药途径的不同进行分组:静脉滴注的40例患者归入对照组,鞘内注射的40例患者归入研究组。组间对比不良反应和CVS的发生率。结果:就CVS发生率而言,研究组为5%,对照组为22.5%;就不良反应率而言,研究组为10%,对照组为35%。研究组均要优于对照组,统计学有差异(P<0.05)。结论:相比于静脉注射,鞘内注射的给药途径更有利于尼莫地平发挥脑血管痉挛防治效果。
Objective： To compare the different effects of nimodipine on cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage under different administration routes. Methods： 80 SAH patients in our hospital from May 2014 to 2016 treated with nimodipine were divided into two groups： the intravenous infusion group （control group）, and the intrathecal injection group （study group）. Incidence of adverse reactions and adverse reactions were compared between groups. Results： In terms of incidence, the study group was 5%, the control group was 22.5%. The adverse reaction rate was 10% in study group, and the control group was 35%. Research group were better than the control group, with significant difference （P〈0.05）. Conclusion： Compared with intravenous injection, intrathecal injection is more beneficial for the prevention and treatment of cerebral vasospasm.
出处
《药品评价》
CAS
2016年第16期38-40,共3页
Drug Evaluation
关键词
尼莫地平
不同给药途径
蛛网膜下腔出血
防治效果
脑血管痉挛
Nimodipine
Different Administration Routes
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Prevention and Cure Effect
Cerebral Vasospasm
