阿替普酶注射剂治疗急性缺血性脑卒中的临床研究
[Abstract]:Objective to observe the clinical efficacy and safety of different dosage and time of thrombolysis with ateptidase in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Methods 220 patients with acute ischemic stroke were randomly divided into three groups: group A (n = 90), group B (n = 90) and group C (n = 40). Patients in group A were treated with ateptidase 0.6 mg kg~ (- 1), intravenous drip, thrombolysis time for 30 min;. Group B was given ateptidase 0.6 mg kg~ (- 1), intravenous drip, thrombolysis time about 60 min;C, intravenous infusion of atteppase 0.9 mg kg~ (- 1), intravenous infusion, thrombolysis time about 60 min.. After one day of thrombolytic therapy, all patients were given aspirin 100 mg 路d ~ (- 1), qd, orally for 3 months. (NIHSS) scores and adverse drug reactions were compared among the three groups. Results the NIHSS scores of group A, B and C were (7.11 卤0.83), (8.24 卤0.96), (8.32 卤1.38) one hour after treatment. The NIHSS scores of group A, B and C were (7.92 卤0.93), (8.92 卤1.03), (9.09 卤1.17) on the 1st day after treatment. The NIHSS scores of group A, B and C were (6.63 卤0.77), (7.31 卤0.83), (7.36 卤0.88) on the 7th day after treatment. The NIHSS scores of group A, B and C were (4.89 卤0.62), (5.62 卤0.76), (5.78 卤0.87) 30 days after treatment. 90 days after treatment, the scores of NIHSS in group A, B and C were (3.53 卤0.58), (4.77 卤0.55), (4.69 卤0.61) respectively. There was significant difference between group A and group B and C (P0.05). But there was no significant difference between group B and group C (P0.05). On the 90th day after treatment, the good prognosis rates of A, B and C groups were 72.22% (65 / 90), 54.44% (49 / 90), 55.00% (22 / 40,), A and B, n = 40), respectively. There was significant difference between group C and group C (P0.05), but there was no significant difference between group B and group C (P0.05). The adverse drug reactions in group 3 were mainly gingival bleeding, A, B, The adverse drug reaction rates in group C were 8.89%, 12.22% and 17.50%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). Conclusion Ateppase 0.6 mg kg~ (- 1), thrombolytic therapy for 30 min is effective in the treatment of stroke, which not only does not increase the risk of bleeding, but also lightens the economic burden of the patients.
【作者单位】: 临沂市人民医院急诊科;
【基金】:国家医学教育发展中心医学研究课题基金资助项目(2010-34-03-022)
【分类号】:R743.3
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 颜滢;黄晨;姚科;;注射用阿替普酶致颅内出血1例[J];中国药物警戒;2010年11期
2 海燕;;名刊[J];中国处方药;2008年10期
3 陈学东;王中华;田磊;杨晓冬;王世华;王育红;;阿替普酶治疗下肢深静脉血栓形成的临床研究[J];中国普通外科杂志;2011年12期
4 张世江;;小剂量阿替普酶治疗老老年急性心肌梗死的疗效[J];实用药物与临床;2011年06期
5 杜菲;;阿替普酶直接给药以溶解腿部血栓[J];心血管病防治知识(科普版);2012年03期
6 金秉祥;;急性缺血性脑卒中阿替普酶溶栓预后影响因素临床研究[J];中国卫生产业;2013年26期
7 阙俐,吴伟;可与阿替普酶媲美的新型血栓溶解药[J];国外医药(合成药 生化药 制剂分册);2000年04期
8 邓晓丽;张艺;;10例肺栓塞病人应用阿替普酶溶栓治疗的护理[J];全科护理;2013年28期
9 高志红;宁鸿珍;;阿替普酶静脉溶栓治疗急性脑梗死效果观察及护理对策[J];临床合理用药杂志;2014年04期
10 宁俊凯;杨昌云;;阿替普酶致畏冷寒战高热1例[J];医药导报;2014年08期
相关会议论文 前4条
1 林芳芳;;阿替普酶治疗1例急性脑梗死患者的护理体会[A];2012年河南省急诊新业务、新视角、新理念及规范化管理研讨会论文集[C];2012年
2 黄瑾;周博;鲁静;;阿替普酶治疗下肢深静脉血栓的护理体会[A];中华护理学会第8届全国造口、伤口、失禁护理学术交流会议、全国外科护理学术交流会议、全国神经内、外科护理学术交流会议论文汇编[C];2011年
3 黄瑾;周博;鲁静;;阿替普酶治疗糖尿病患者下肢深静脉血栓的护理体会[A];全国内科护理学术交流会议、全国心脏内、外科护理学术交流会议、第9届全国糖尿病护理学术交流会议、第9届全国血液净化护理学术交流会议论文汇编[C];2011年
4 朱碧宏;王志敏;黄丹江;韩钊;;阿替普酶在脑梗死4.5小时内静脉溶栓回顾性分析[A];2012年浙江省神经病学学术年会论文集[C];2012年
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 徐蜀远;溶栓药物的研究进展(下)[N];中国医药报;2001年
相关博士学位论文 前2条
1 朱子龙;芬戈莫德联合阿替普酶治疗急性缺血性脑卒中探究性研究[D];天津医科大学;2016年
2 林念童;急性缺血性脑卒中阿替普酶溶栓预后影响因素临床研究[D];南方医科大学;2012年
相关硕士学位论文 前6条
1 梁晶;阿替普酶与巴曲酶治疗急性脑梗死的疗效及安全性比较研究[D];吉林大学;2015年
2 陈川;阿替普酶与尿激酶静脉溶栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中疗效和安全性的Meta分析[D];广西医科大学;2016年
3 彭博;尿激酶及阿替普酶治疗急性脑梗死疗效及安全性的比较研究[D];大连医科大学;2014年
4 刘备;阿替普酶辅助微创术治疗脑出血的临床观察[D];重庆医科大学;2014年
5 崔悦;阿替普酶治疗急性脑梗死的疗效观察[D];天津医科大学;2014年
6 林艳;阿替普酶对急性脑梗死大鼠超时间窗静脉溶栓的疗效评价[D];山东大学;2014年
,本文编号:2455563
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/jjyx/2455563.html