急性心肌梗死临床治疗效果分析

目的探究急性心肌梗死患者的临床治疗方式与效果。方法本次研究81例对象,皆为我院2010年2月~2013年2月门诊及住院接诊的急性心肌梗死患者,全部经临床确诊。根据患者自愿原则分为研究组与对照组,对照组40例患者,采用常规治疗+低分子肝素治疗,研究组41例患者,在对照组治疗方式上加用尿激酶溶栓治疗。对两组患者临床治疗效果、不良反应发生情况及治疗后LVEDD(室舒张末期内径)与LVEF(左心射血分数)水平进行观察对比及分析。结果经过治疗后,研究组治疗总有效率与不良反应发生率依次为95.12%(39/41)、2.44%(1/41),对照组则为82.50%(33/40)、15.00%(6/40),两者患者总有效率与不良反应发生率差异性显著(P0.01),有统计学意义。治疗后,研究组患者LVEDD与LVEF水平有着显著性差异(P0.05),有统计学意义。结论对于急性心肌梗死患者,在常规治疗+低分子肝素治疗基础上给予尿激酶溶栓治疗可以取得比较理想的效果,患者治疗总有效率高、不良反应发生少,同时心肌功能恢复较好,值得临床推广及应用。

Analysis of treatment outcome of acute myocardial infarction

Objective To investigate and analyze the clinical effect of intravenous thrombolysis in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction （AMI）. Methods A total of 102 AMI patients treated in our hospital were included in the study. These subjects were randomly divided into control group and observation group. The control group received conventional treatment, while the observation group received intravenous thrombolysis. The treatment outcomes of the two groups were analyzed based on revascularization rate and incidence of adverse events. Results In the control group, 33 patients （66.0%） had revasculafization, versus 43 patients （82.7%） in the observation group; there was significant difference in this index between the two groups （P〈0.05）. During treatment, 8 eases （16.0%） of the control group had adverse events, versus 3 cases （5.8%） of the observation group; there was significant difference in this index between the two groups （P〈0.05）. Conclusion Intravenous thrombolysis using urokinase has the advantages of high safety, good efficacy, and low cost in the treatment of AMI and holds promise for clinical application in primary hospitals.