静脉溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死的临床分析

目的 采用静脉溶栓疗法,比较不同静脉溶栓药物治疗急性心肌梗死的临床效果,对静脉溶栓法治疗急性心肌梗死的临床疗效进行分析。方法 研究共收集120例临床确诊为急性心肌梗死的患者,随机分为三组,每组40例.常规治疗组采用常规方法进行治疗,另外两组分别采用尿激酶和阿替普酶进行静脉溶栓。结果 采用静脉溶栓的两组临床疗效明显优于常规治疗组（P＜0.05）,其中阿替普酶组临床疗效明显优于尿激酶组（P＜0.05）.并且,治疗过程中采用静脉溶栓治疗的两组出现并发症的例数少于常规治疗组,治疗后左室射血分数和左室舒张末径水平高于常规治疗组。结论 相比常规治疗方法,静脉溶栓疗法治疗急性心肌梗死具有较大优势,其中阿替普酶的临床治疗效果优于尿激酶。

Clinical analyze of thrombolytic therapy method in treating acute myocardial infarction

Objective To investigate the therapeutic effects of different thrombolytic agents and methods in treating acute myocardial infarction. Methods 120 patients suffered from acute myocardial infarction were divided into three groups randomly, 40 patients in each group. Patients in control group received routine therapy, meanwhile, patients the other two groups received intravenous thrombolysis with urokinase （UK） and alteplase separately. Results The clinical efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis groups were better than that of control group （P 〈 0. 05 ） , in addition, alteplase group present better efficacy than UK group（ P 〈 0. 05 ）. During the course of the treatment, less complications occurred in intravenous thrombolysis groups, left ventricular ejection fraction （LVEF） and left ventricular end - diastolic diameter（LVEDD） of the two groups after treatment were higher than that of routine group. Conclusions Compare with routine therapy, intravenous thrombolysis method have more advantages in treating acute myocardial infarction, especially aheplase.