摘要
目的比较分析胺碘酮和普罗帕酮治疗阵发性室上性心动过速的临床效果,为临床合理用药提供参考。方法选取阵发性室上性心动过速患者80例,收治时间在2014年2月~2016年5月,分为两组,对照组患者采用普罗帕酮治疗,观察组患者采用胺碘酮治疗。结果观察组患者的总有效率(97.50%)和对照组患者的总有效率(95.00%)相比,无显著差异(P>0.05);观察组患者的复律时间(26.64±12.13)与对照组(13.02±6.46)相比,具有显著差异(P<0.05);观察组患者的复律率(70.00%)与对照组(67.50%)相比,无显著差异(P>0.05);观察组不良反应发生率为7.50%,对照组患者不良反应发生率为25.00%,两组相比具有显著差异(P<0.05)。结论胺碘酮和普罗帕酮治疗阵发性室上性心动过速的总有效率与复律率无显著差异,但普罗帕酮起效较快、不良反应较多,适用于治疗无严重器质性心脏病患者,而胺碘酮起效较慢并且不良反应较少,为心功能较差患者首选治疗药物。
Objective To compare the clinical effect of amiodarone and propafenone in the treatment of paroxysmal ventricular tachycardia,and to provide reference for clinical rational drug use. Methods During the period from February 2014 to May 2016,80 cases with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia were treated in Qingyuan County Hospital of TCM,They were randomly divided into two groups,namely,the observation group（ 40 cases） and the control group（ 40 cases）. The observation group was treated with amiodarone,and the control group were treated with propafenone. Results The total effective rate of the observation group and the control group were respectively 97. 50%and 95%,there were no significant differences in two groups（ P〉0. 05）; The recovery time of the observation group and the control group were respectively 26. 64 ± 12. 13 and 13. 02 ± 6. 46,the difference was statistically significant（ P〈0. 05）; the recovery rate of the observation group and the control group were respectively 70% and 67. 50%,there were also no significant differences in two groups（ P〉0. 05）; adverse reaction incidence rate of the observation group was 7. 50%,and adverse reaction incidence rate of the control group was 25. 00%,the difference was statistically significant（ P〈0. 05）. Conclusions Amiodarone and propafenone on paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia rate had a significant effect,but propafenone takes effect faster,more adverse reactions for in the treatment of patients with severe organic heart disease,and amiodarone slower onset and fewer adverse reactions,poor heart function in patients with drug of first choice in the treatment.
出处
《航空航天医学杂志》
2017年第1期11-13,共3页
Journal of Aerospace medicine
