地高辛联合地尔硫治疗慢性心房纤颤的疗效与价值

目的:探讨不同剂量地尔硫联合地高辛治疗心房纤颤的疗效.方法:选择20例需长期口服地高辛的慢性心房纤颤患者,根据治疗情况逐渐增加不同剂量的地尔硫,并观察静息与运动时心率、血压以及静息时心率血压乘积的变化.结果:对于不伴明显心功能不全的慢性心房纤颤患者,应用常规剂量地尔硫(90mg/d)对心室率无明显影响,较大剂量时(135～180mg/d)能明显降低静息时心室率和抑制运动时心室率增加(P<0.05),这种作用呈剂量依赖性.结论:慢性房颤患者在应用地高辛基础上加用较大剂量地尔硫能有效控制心室率.     

地高辛联合地尔硫治疗慢性心房纤颤的疗效与价值

目的 :探讨不同剂量地尔硫联合地高辛治疗心房纤颤的疗效。方法 :选择 2 0例需长期口服地高辛的慢性心房纤颤患者 ,根据治疗情况逐渐增加不同剂量的地尔硫 ,并观察静息与运动时心率、血压以及静息时心率血压乘积的变化。结果 :对于不伴明显心功能不全的慢性心房纤颤患者 ,应用常规剂量地尔硫 (90 mg/d)对心室率无明显影响 ,较大剂量时 (135～ 180 mg/d)能明显降低静息时心室率和抑制运动时心室率增加 (P<0 .0 5 ) ,这种作用呈剂量依赖性。结论 :慢性房颤患者在应用地高辛基础上加用较大剂量地尔硫能有效控制心室率。     

静脉注射地尔硫(艹卓)治疗肺心病并快速心房纤颤疗效评价

本文对65例肺心病并快速心房纤颤的病人静脉注射地尔硫[艹卓]，以探讨其临床疗效和安全性，报道如下。     

地高辛联合地尔硫Zhuo治疗慢性心房纤颤的疗效与价值

目的：探讨不同剂量地尔硫Zhuo联合地高辛治疗心房纤颤的疗效。方法：选择20例需长期口服地高辛的慢性心房纤颤患，根据治疗情况逐渐增加不同剂量的地尔硫Zhuo，并观察静息与运动时心率，血压以及静息时心率血压乘积的变化。结果：对于不伴明显心功能不全的慢性心房纤颤患，应用常规剂量地尔硫Zhuo（90mg/d)对心室率无明显影响，较大剂量时（135－180mg/d)能明显降低静息时心室率和抑制运动时心室率增加（P＜0．05）。这种作用呈剂量依赖性。结论：慢性房颤患在应用地高辛基础上加用较大剂量地尔硫Zhuo能有效控制心室率。     

静脉注射美托洛尔、地尔硫卓治疗快速心房纤颤的临床疗效观察

目的:观察美托洛尔注射液和地尔硫卓注射液治疗快速房颤的有效性和安全性。方法:105例符合入选标准的快速房颤患者被随机分为3组,美托洛尔组39例:5mg美托洛尔缓慢静脉注射,观察5min,如无效重复一次,连续用药3次,总量15mg;地尔硫卓35例:地尔硫卓15mg稀释后静脉注射,观察15min,如无效重复1次,继以15mg/h维持。西地兰组31例:西地兰0.2～0.4mg稀释后静脉注射,观察10min,如无效追加0.2～0.4mg,连续用药3次;总量0.6～1.0mg。记录用药前、后心室率和血压变化,并比较在各观察时间点上的有效率。结果:与西地兰相比,美托洛尔和地尔硫卓起效更快[(36.9±11.6)min∶(8.2±4.5)min∶(9.1±3.8)min,P<0.05],心室率下降幅度更明显(25.22%∶33.32%∶37.50%,P<0.05),治疗有效率更高(71.0%∶89.7%∶91.4%,P<0.05)。而美托洛尔组和地尔硫卓组之间无显著性差异。三组均无严重不良反应发生。结论:美托洛尔注射液和地尔硫卓注射液均能快速、安全、有效控制快速房颤的心室率。     

医院外使用地尔硫治疗快速心房颤动

目的 评价医院外静脉注射地尔硫(艹卓)治疗快速心房颤动(房颤)或心房扑动(房扑)的疗效。 方法 采用回顾性对照研究。地尔硫(艹卓)治疗组43例来自1999年全美辅助医疗机构的快速房颤或房扑患者,平均心室率≥150次/分,接受9个月地尔硫(艹卓)治疗,平均剂量19.8mg。对照组27例,从1998年起未用地尔硫(艹卓)治疗。剔除气管插管或电击复律史者。以转为窦性心率、心室率≤100次/分或     

地尔硫(艹卓)在急诊控制心房颤动快速心室率中的应用

目的观察比较静脉注射地尔硫(艹卓)、毛花甙C控制急诊心房颤动快速心室率即时疗效比较及安全性.方法71例急诊心房颤动伴快速心室率患者随机分成2组,分别静脉注射地尔硫(艹卓)或毛花甙C.结果地尔硫(艹卓)、毛花甙C二组控制心房颤动快速心室率总有效率为93.5%,72.9%;心室率平均下降幅度分别为36%、28%;平均起效时间为6.5±3.4min、24±16.5min.地尔硫(艹卓)组有2例出现一过性低血压,可自行恢复.结论静脉注射地尔硫(艹卓)10mg,10～15mg/h维持静脉滴注对心房颤动快速心室率的控制安全、迅速、有效.     

地尔硫卓注射液治疗老年人非心脏手术后高血压的临床应用

目的 观察地尔硫卓注射液治疗老年人非心脏手术后高血压的疗效和安全性.方法 采用随机、对照方法将58例老年非心脏手术后高血压患者分为地尔硫卓组(n=30)与硝酸甘油组(n=28),分别用地尔硫卓注射液与硝酸甘油注射液治疗,剂量分别为每分钟5～15 μg/kg 和每分钟5～15 μg.观察两组用药前后30、60、120分钟血压和心率变化.结果 地尔硫卓组与硝酸甘油组血压均显著下降,总有效率分别为80%和82.1%,组间比较差异无显著性(P＞0.05),不良反应轻.结论 地尔硫卓治疗老年人非心脏手术后高血压安全、有效,与硝酸甘油相似,而在降低心率作用方面更优于硝酸甘油.     

地尔硫卓对心房急性电重构影响的临床研究

探讨地尔硫卓对心房快速激动诱发心房急性电重构的影响。将 31例导管射频消融成功的室上性心动过速患者随机分为两组 ,对照组 2 1例、地尔硫卓组 10例 ,以 15 0～ 2 0 0ms起搏周长 (PCL)诱发急性心房颤动 (AF)。以4 0 0msPCL分别在高位右房 (HRA)、低位右房 (LRA)、His束区 (HIS)等部位进行S1S2 扫描 ,测定基础状态、干预后和心房快速激动后心房有效不应期 (AERP) ;以三种不同PCL (35 0 ,4 0 0和 4 5 0ms)随机对右心耳 (RAA)进行S1S2 扫描 ,观察AERP频率自适应性的变化。对照组心房快速激动后HRA、LRA、HIS和RAA的AERP较基础状态、给盐水后有明显缩短 ;而地尔硫卓组心房快速激动后上述指标变化无显著性差异。将RAA处AERP与相应PCL进行曲线拟合 ,对照组基础状态下斜率为 0 .0 5 8、给盐水后斜率为 0 .0 6 8和心房快速激动后斜率为 0 .0 15。地尔硫卓组则分别为0 .0 30 ,0 .0 7和 0 .0 6 0。对照组诱发继发AF 13例 (13/2 1,6 1.9% ) ,明显高于地尔硫卓组 3例 (3/10 ,30 .0 % ) ,继发AF平均时限两组无明显差别。结论 :预先给予地尔硫卓可以阻止心房快速激动诱发的心房急性电重构的发生     

比索洛尔、地尔硫卓治疗老年单纯性收缩期高血压的疗效观察

目的比较比索洛尔、地尔硫卓治疗老年单纯性收缩期高血压的降压疗效和安全性。方法将128例老年单纯性收缩期高血压病人随机分为比索洛尔组43例、地尔硫卓组45例、硝苯地平控释片组40例,均治疗6周,与硝苯地平控释片进行比较,观察比索洛尔及地尔硫卓的降压达标率。结果 3组治疗后血压、心率均低于治疗前(P 0.05),比索洛尔组、地尔硫卓组治疗后血压、心率低于硝苯地平组(P 0.05)。治疗第2周时,地尔硫卓组血压达标率为9.2%,比索洛尔组达标率为9.9%,均低于硝苯地平组(22.2%),差异有统计学意义(P 0.05)。比索洛尔组和地尔硫卓组血压控制不达标的病人加用硝苯地平控释片联合治疗后,血压达标率上升。治疗2个月后,比索洛尔组、地尔硫卓组收缩压达标率为52.1%、55.6%,低于硝苯地平缓释片组(58.3%),但差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论以比索洛尔及地尔硫卓为基础的降压治疗均能使老年单纯性收缩期高血压病人收缩压及舒张压显著下降,比索洛尔及地尔硫卓缓释剂单一治疗临床疗效劣于硝苯地平控释片。     

静脉应用地尔硫卓和美托洛尔治疗老年心功能衰竭伴心房颤动快速心室率的疗效和安全性比较

目的比较在中重度心功能衰竭伴心房颤动快速心室率的老年患者静脉注射地尔硫卓和美托洛尔控制心室率的有效性和安全性。方法采用随机单盲方法,将72例中重度心功能衰竭伴心房颤动快速心室率的老年患者分为2组,分别给予地尔硫卓和美托洛尔静脉注射,观察有效率及血压、症状和体征变化。结果地尔硫卓组有效率为94.6%,用药前心室率为149±26次/min、用药后120min降至97±19次/min,下降幅度为35%;美托洛尔组有效率为97.1%,用药前后心室率分别为150±27、95±18次/min,下降幅度为37%。两组血压均有下降但多在正常范围,地尔硫卓组无心功能恶化,美托洛尔组1例心功能恶化。结论静脉注射地尔硫卓和美托洛尔均能有效地控制老年中重度心功能衰竭患者的心房颤动快速心室率,且相对安全。     

Efficacy and safety of intravenous diltiazem for treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. The Diltiazem-Atrial Fibrillation/Flutter Study Group

This study evaluates the effectiveness and safety of intravenous diltiazem for the treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. A double-blind, parallel, randomized, placebo-controlled protocol was used, and 6 large, urban hospitals, both university-affiliated and private, participated. The study involved 113 patients with atrial fibrillation or flutter, a ventricular rate greater than or equal to 120 beats/min and systolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 90 mm Hg without severe heart failure. The dose of intravenous diltiazem (or identical placebo) was 0.25 mg/kg/2 minutes followed 15 minutes later by 0.35 mg/kg/2 minutes if the first dose was tolerated but ineffective. If a patient did not respond, the code was broken and the patient was allowed to receive open-label diltiazem if placebo had been given. Of 56 patients, 42 (75%) randomized to receive diltiazem responded to 0.25 mg/kg and 10 of 14 responded to 0.35 mg/kg, for a total response rate of 52 of 56 patients (93%), whereas 7 of 57 patients (12%) responded to placebo (p less than 0.001). After the double-blind protocol, 49 of the 57 patients who received placebo were then given diltiazem; 47 of 49 responded, for an overall response rate of 99 of 105 patients (94%) with diltiazem. The median time from the start of drug infusion to the maximal decrease in heart rate was 4.3 minutes. Side effects occurred in 14 patients, 7 of whom had asymptomatic hypotension not requiring intervention. Thus, intravenous diltiazem was rapidly effective for slowing the ventricular response in most patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Blood pressure decreased slightly. Side effects were mild.     

艾司洛尔、胺碘酮和地尔硫(艹卓)治疗麻醉期间快室率心房颤动的比较

目的 观察静脉注射艾司洛尔、胺碘酮和地尔硫革治疗麻醉期间快室率心房颤动(房颤)的有效性和安全性.方法 将90例快室率房颤患者随机分为艾司洛尔组(Ⅰ组)、胺碘酮组(Ⅱ组)和地尔硫革组(Ⅲ组).Ⅰ组先以艾司洛尔0.5 mg/kg负荷量于1 min内静脉注射,继之以0.05mg·kg-1·min-1静脉泵注射;Ⅱ组以胺碘酮3 mg/kg于10 min内静脉注射,继之以1 mg/min静脉泵注射;Ⅲ组以地尔硫革0.25 mg/kg于5 min内静脉注射.观察用药前及用药后5、10、15、30、60、90min患者的心室率、血压、心律;观察起效时间及不良反应.结果 起效时间Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ组分别为(4.3±2.1)min、(19.2±8.5)min、(8.5±3.4)min,组间比较差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05);有效率在用药后30 min内组间比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),但总有效率(用药后90 min时)三组组间比较差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).总不良反应发生率Ⅱ组低于Ⅰ组、Ⅲ组(P＜0.05),Ⅰ组与Ⅲ组组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 艾司洛尔、胺碘酮和地尔硫革均可安全有效地治疗麻醉期间的快室率房颤,艾司洛尔起效最迅速,胺碘酮应用最安全.     

Acute ventricular rate control in atrial fibrillation: IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin vs. IV diltiazem alone

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy of an IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin vs IV diltiazem alone for acute ventricular rate control in patients with atrial fibrillation. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, open-label study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with atrial fibrillation and uncontrolled ventricular rates were randomized to receive either an IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin or IV diltiazem alone and were observed for 12 h. The successful rate control was defined as a ventricular rate < 100 beats per minute (bpm) persisting for 1 h or conversion to sinus rhythm. The loss of rate control was defined as an increase in the ventricular rate to > 100 bpm persistently for > 30 min or rebound to atrial fibrillation. RESULTS: In both treatment arms (n = 26 each), all patients achieved successful and comparable ventricular rate control at 12 h. The mean (+/- SD) time taken to achieve successful rate control was shorter in the combination arm (15 +/- 16 vs. 22 +/- 22 min). Six patients in the combination arm and 11 in the diltiazem-alone arm experienced episodes of loss of rate control. This loss in the combination arm was less than that in the diltiazem-alone arm (14 vs 39 episodes; p = 0.05). The loss of rate control per patient in the combination arm was also less than that in the diltiazem-alone arm (2.0 +/- 1.0 vs. 3.5 +/- 1.9 episodes per patient; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that in patients with atrial fibrillation who have a rapid ventricular response, the IV combination of diltiazem and digoxin results in a more efficacious ventricular rate control with fewer fluctuations than that achieved by therapy with IV diltiazem alone.     

艾司洛尔与毛花苷控制快速房颤心室率的疗效及安全性比较

目的：比较艾司洛尔与毛花苷控制快速心房颤动心室率的即时疗效及安全性。方法：72例快速心房颤动患者，心室率≥120次/min，被随机分为艾司洛尔组、毛花苷组各36例。艾司洛尔组首次剂量给予0.5mg/kg，1 min静注，观察5min，若心室率仍＞100次/min或下降＜20％，则追加0.5mg/kg，同时以0.05mg·kg^-1·min^-1微量泵起始维持，维持量最大可加至0.3mg· kg^-1·min^-1；毛花苷组首次剂量给予毛花苷0.4mg或0.2mg缓慢静注，若心室率仍＞100次/min或下降＜20％，可追加0.2mg。记录药物起效时间及不良反应。结果：艾司洛组平均起效时间显著低于毛花苷组[（5.6±3.1）min比（39.2±8.7）min]（P＜0.01）；两组患者用药后心室率均明显降低（P＜0.05或＜0.01），用药2h后艾司洛尔组心室率下降幅度显著大于毛花苷组（39％比29％，P＜0.05）；两组总有效率，不良反应发生率均无统计学差异（P＞0.05）。结论：静脉应用艾司洛尔作用迅速，安全有效，可作为控制快速心房颤动心室率的首选治疗。     

Effect of diltiazem and metoprolol on left atrial appendix functions in patients with nonvalvular chronic atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: Thrombo-embolic events are the important cause of mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (CAF). The origin of thromboembolism is often the left atrial appendix (LAA). Flow rate velocity (FRV) inside the LAA is the major determinant of thrombus formation. The aim of our study was to investigate the effects of diltiazem and metoprolol used for ventricular rate control on FRV of the LAA in CAF patients and thus to evaluate the positive or negative effects of these two drugs on thromboembolic events. METHODS: Sixty-four patients were included in the study. All patients were suffering from CAF for more than a year. The patients were allocated to two groups according with agent used for rate control- metoprolol (Group 1; n=31) and diltiazem (Group 2; n=33). Transesophageal echocardiography was applied to all patients and LAA FRV was measured by a pulse wave Doppler in the 1/3 proximal portion of the LAA. The measurements were repeated after applying 5 mg metoprolol to Group 1 and 25 mg diltiazem to Group 2 via venous cannula. RESULTS: In Group 1 after metoprolol LAA flow velocity changed from 0.25 +/- 0.90 m/s to 0.25 +/- 0.10 m/s (p>0.05). In group 2 after diltiazem left atrial appendix FRV decreased from 0.21 +/- 0.9 m/s to 0.19 +/- 0.6 m/s (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CAF metoprolol used for ventricular rate control had no effect on LAA flow velocity and the observed decrease in LAA flow rate velocity with intravenous diltiazem was insignificant.     

地尔硫注射液治疗老年心力衰竭伴快速房性心律失常的疗效和安全性研究

目的观察老年中度和重度心力衰竭伴快速房性心律失常(包括心房颤动和心房扑动)患者静脉注射地尔硫控制心室率的有效性和安全性。方法选取NYHAⅢ、Ⅳ级的中、重度心力衰竭伴快速房性心律失常的老年患者,给予地尔硫静脉注射,观察有效率及血压、症状和体征变化。结果85例患者入选,80例(94.1%)患者有效,心室率由用药前的(149.5±18.2)次/分下降至用药结束时的(95.3±17.5)次/分,下降幅度36.2%,平均起效时间(6.3±3.9)分钟,用药前后心室率下降有显著意义(P<0.001)。所有患者血压均有下降但多在正常范围,有5例出现低血压,1例出现Ⅰ度房室传导阻滞伴窦性心动过缓,无1例出现心功能恶化。结论静脉注射地尔硫能迅速有效地控制中重度心力衰竭伴快速房性心律失常的老年患者的快速心室率,而且安全性高。     

地尔硫(艹卓)与西地兰-D对心房颤动心室率的控制及其对房室传导的影响

目的:比较地尔硫革(Diltiazem)及西地兰-D对心房颤动(房颤)心室率控制的安全性和有效率以及对传导系统的影响。方法:对43例房颤患者随机地接受0.4mg西地兰-D(n-22)或0.25mg/kg地尔硫(?)(n=21)。120 min时无效者重复同剂量地尔硫(?)或0.2 mg西地兰-D。记录用药前后5、10、20、30、60 min的心室率及血压。无效者观察120 min及第2次用药者180 min的心室率及血压。19例窦性心律患者随机分为西地兰-D(n=10)和地尔硫(?)(n=9)组行希氏束电图检查测量PA、AH、HV间期而评估西地兰-D及地尔硫(?)对传导系统的影响。记录药物注射前及注射后的5、10、20、30 min的希氏束电图。结果:地尔硫(?)及西地兰-D组中180min内能有效控制心室率分别为20及15例(95.2％:68.2％,P<0.05)。地尔硫(?)及西地兰-D均延长AH间期,但对PA、HV问期无影响。结论:地尔硫(?)及西地兰-D均能减慢房颤心室率,但地尔硫(?)的有效率、心室率下降幅度优于西地兰-D。地尔硫(?)对心室率快的房颤伴充血性心力衰竭患者是一种较为合适的药物,在密切监护下应是安全的。两药均不影响HV、PA间期而通过延长AH间期减慢心室率。     

Effects of diltiazem in supraventricular paroxysmal tachyarrhythmias

Diltiazem (0.3 mg/kg body weight intravenous in 2 minutes) was administered to 40 patients (24 males, 16 females, mean age 51.55 years) with paroxysmal supraventricular tachyarrhythmias: 7 patients with atrial fibrillation, 6 patients with atrial flutter, 25 patients with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia, 2 patients with uncommon atrioventricular reciprocating tachycardia. In patients with atrial fibrillation intravenous diltiazem produced a significant decrease of ventricular response (from 160 +/- 11 to 113.57 +/- 10.34--p less than 0.01). In patients with atrial flutter intravenous diltiazem produced variable effects: an increase in atrio-ventricular block (from 2:1 to 3:1 atrio-ventricular conduction (2 patients); conversion to sinus rhythm (1 patient); change to atrial fibrillation (1 patient); no appreciable change of the basic rhythm (2 patients). In paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia patients conversion to sinus rhythm occurred in 20/22 patients (91%) treated with intravenous diltiazem (mean conversion time 4.69 minutes). In the 2 patients with uncommon atrioventricular nodal reciprocating tachycardia diltiazem increased P'-R and R-P' intervals without appreciable change of the basic rhythm. No serious side effects from drug administration were noted. Intravenous diltiazem appears to be as a highly effective medication in conversion or control of paroxysmal supraventricular tachyarrhythmias.     

Efficacy of flecainide acetate for atrial arrhythmias following coronary artery bypass grafting

The antiarrhythmic efficacy of intravenous flecainide and intravenous digoxin was assessed in 29 patients (26 men), aged 43 to 73 (63 +/- 7) years who developed atrial arrhythmias in the first 96 hours after coronary artery bypass grafting. Twenty-seven had atrial fibrillation and 2 had atrial flutter. Patients were entered into the study if the arrhythmia persisted for at least 15 minutes with a ventricular rate greater than 120 beats/min. Fifteen patients were randomized to flecainide (group 1) and 14 to digoxin (group 2). Flecainide was given as a bolus of 1 mg/kg over 10 minutes followed by an infusion of 1.5 mg/kg/hr for 1 hour and then 0.25 mg/kg/hr for the rest of the study period (24 hours). Digoxin was given as 3 bolus doses (0.5 mg followed after 6 and 12 hours by 0.25 mg). In both groups, 10 mg of verapamil was given intravenously after 45 minutes if the arrhythmia persisted with a mean ventricular rate greater than 100 beats/min. The antiarrhythmic efficacy was assessed by 24-hour Holter monitoring and frequent 15-second rhythm strips. Within 45 minutes control of arrhythmia, which was maintained for the rest of the study period, was achieved in 10 of 15 patients in group 1 and 2 of 14 in group 2 (p less than 0.01). Nine of 15 reverted to sinus rhythm in group 1 compared to 0 of 14 in group 2 and 1 of 15 remained in arrhythmia with a controlled ventricular rate in group 1 compared to 2 of 14 in group 2.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)