论文部分内容阅读
目的比较溶栓与抗凝同时进行和先溶栓后抗凝两种方法治疗急性心肌梗死(AMI)的疗效。方法收集AMI病例201份。随机分为抗凝溶栓同时进行组(A组)和先溶栓后抗凝组治疗(B组),每组根据发病时间又进一步分为A1、A2、A3和B1、B2、B3组。通过观察患者的血管再通率、心电图S-T段的变化、并发症和死亡率来判定治疗的疗效。结果与B组比较,A组的患者血管再通率高、S-T段下降幅度大、并发症少、死亡率低。结论溶栓抗凝同时进行的用药方法优于先溶栓后抗凝组。
Objective To compare the efficacy of both thrombolysis and anticoagulation in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) by both anticoagulation and anticoagulation after thrombolytic therapy. Methods 201 AMI cases were collected. Patients were randomly divided into anticoagulation and thrombolysis group (group A) and anticoagulation group (group B). Each group was further divided into groups A1, A2, A3 and B1, B2 and B3 according to the onset time. By observing the patients recanalization rate, S-T ECG changes, complications and mortality to determine the efficacy of treatment. Results Compared with group B, the recanalization rate of patients in group A was higher than that of group B, the S-T segment decreased greatly, the complication was low and the mortality was low. Conclusion The thrombolytic anticoagulation is better than the first anticoagulation after thrombolysis.