期刊文献+

消化内镜与常规药物治疗上消化道出血的效果比较 被引量:2

原文传递
导出
摘要 目的对比分析消化内镜与常规药物治疗上消化道出血的临床效果。方法选取2020年3月至2022年3月汝州市人民医院收治的上消化道出血患者84例为研究对象。按照随机数字表法分为常规组与内镜组,每组42例。常规组予以常规药物治疗,内镜组予以消化内镜治疗。比较两组疗效、出血控制情况、临床相关指标及胃肠功能。结果治疗后,内镜组治疗总有效率(97.62%,41/42)比常规组(80.95%,34/42)高,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=4.480,P<0.05)。治疗后,内镜组出血控制时间和彻底止血时间较常规组短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。与常规组比较,治疗后内镜组输血量较少,肠鸣音恢复时间和住院时间较短(P<0.05)。治疗前,两组胃肠功能评分比较,差异未见统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后,内镜组胃肠功能评分较常规组低(P<0.05)。结论对上消化道出血患者采用消化内镜治疗,能够提高止血效果,缩短出血控制和彻底止血时间,减少输血量,并可促进患者胃肠功能和机体恢复。
作者 杨江红
出处 《临床医学》 CAS 2023年第1期63-65,共3页 Clinical Medicine
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

二级参考文献113

  • 1Lau JY, Sung J, Hill C, et al. Systematic review of the epidemiology of complicated peptic ulcer disease: incidence, recurrence, risk factors and mortality [ J]. Digestion, 2011,84 (2) :102-113.
  • 2Roekey DC. Occult and obscure gastrointestinal bleeding:causes and chnical management [ J ]. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2010,7 ( 5 ) :265-279.
  • 3Srygley FD, Gerardo CJ, Tran T, et al. Does this patient have a severe upper gastrointestinal bleed? [ J ]. JAMA, 2012, 307 (10) : 1072-1079.
  • 4Bai Y, Du YQ, Wang D, et al. Peptic ulcer bleeding in China:a multicenter endoscopic survey of 1006 patients [J]. J Dig Dis, 2014,15(1 ) :5-11.
  • 5Rockall TA, Logan RF, Devlin HB, et al. Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage [ J ]. Gut, 1996,38 ( 3 ) : 316-321.
  • 6Blatchford O, Murray WR, Blatchford M. A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage [ J ]. Lancet, 2000,356(9238) : 1318-1321.
  • 7Stanley A J, Dalton HR, Blatchford O, et al. Muhicentre comparison of the Glasgow Blatchford and Rockall Scores in the prediction of clinical end-points after upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage[ J]. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2011,34(4) :470- 475.
  • 8Sahzman JR, Tabak YP, Hyett BH, et al. A simple risk scoreaccurately predicts in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and cost in acute upper GI bleeding [ J ]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2011,74 (6) :1215-1224.
  • 9Yaka E, Yllmaz S, Dogan NO, et al. Comparison of the Glasgow- Blatchford and AIMS65 scoring systems for risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department [ J ]. Acad Emerg Med, 2015,22 (1) :22-30.
  • 10Robertson M, Majumdar A, Boyapati R, et al. Risk stratification in acute upper GI bleeding: comparison of the AIMS65 score to the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring systems [ J ]. Gastrointest Endosc, In press 2015.

共引文献244

同被引文献22

引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部