经面罩无创正压通气治疗AECOPD并呼吸衰竭的效果评价

目的探讨与评价经面罩无创正压通气治疗AECOPD并呼吸衰竭的效果。方法选择2010年5月～2011年5月来我院治疗的AECOPD并呼吸衰竭患者46例，对其回顾性分析，分为观察组与对照组各23例。对照组患者主要接受药物治疗．观察组患者在药物治疗的基础上接受经面罩无创正压通气治疗，观察并比较两组患者在治疗前后的心率与呼吸频率，并记录治疗前与治疗后的第3小时和第1、3、7天患者动脉血气的分析结果。结果两组患者在治疗前的心率与呼吸频率比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；两组患者治疗后的心率与呼吸频率比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；两组治疗前的pH、PaO2与PaC02比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；与治疗前相比，两组治疗后3h和1、3、7d患者的pH、PaO2与PaCO2均有所改善，且具有显著差异（P〈0．05）；治疗后3h和1、3、7d，两组比较Pa02与PaC02具有明显差异（P〈0．05）；两组的pH在治疗第1、3天时比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论经面罩无创正压通气治疗AECOPD并呼吸衰竭安全可靠，疗效显著。

valuation of effect of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation via mask in the treatment of AECOPD combined with respiratory failure

Objective To investigate and evaluate the effect of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation via mask in the treatment of AECOPD combined with respiratory failure. Methods A total of 46 cases of AECOPD combined with respiratory failure selected from May 2010 to May 2011 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed, which were divided into the observation group and the control group, each group had 23 cases. The patients in the control group received drugs treatment, while the patients in the observation group were treated with noninvasive positive pressure ventilation via mask on the basis of drugs treatment. The heart rate and respiratory rate of patients in the two groups were observed and compared before and after the treatment, and the arterial blood gas analysis results of patients were recorded before the treatment and at 3 h, 1 d, 3 d, 7 d after the treatment. Results The differences were not statistical- ly significant in the heart rate and respiratory rate before the treatment between the two groups （P 〉 0.05）; The differences were statistically significant in the heart rate and respiratory rate after the treatment between the two groups （P 〈 0.05）; The differences were not statistically significant in the pH, PaO2 and PaC02 before treatment between two groups （P 〉 0.05）; Compared with before the treatment, the PH, PaO2 and PaCO2 of patients in two groups at 3h, ld, 3d, 7d after the treatment improved minimally, and the differences were significant（P 〈 0.05）; The differences were statistically significant in the PaO2 and PaCO2 at 3 h, 1 d, 3 d, 7 d after the treatment between two groups （P 〈 0.05）; The difference was statistically significant in the PH at 1 d, 3 d after the treatment between two groups（P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation via mask in the treatment of AECOPD combined with respiratory failure is safe and reliable, and has significant efficacy.