静脉注射胺碘酮与心律平转复阵发心房颤动的疗效比较

Comparison of the Effect of Amiodaron and Propafenone on Cardioversion of Paroxysmal Auricular Fibrillation

目的对比研究胺碘酮与心律平转复阵发心房颤动的疗效。方法阵发心房颤动（此次病程≤48h）患者58例随机分为两组：胺碘酮组30例，给予胺碘酮负荷量150mg静注后，继以0．6～1．0mg／min维持点滴，依心室率情况调整胺碘酮剂量。心律平组28例，静脉给予心律平1．4～2．0mg／kg，5min内注射，继以0．28mg／min维持静点，无效者改用胺碘酮治疗。结果胺碘酮组转复成功率为86．7％（26／30），心律平组转复成功率57．1％（16／28），且心律平组转复心律失败的部分病例使用胺碘酮仍有效；胺碘酮组平均复律时间（101±95）min（6～508min），心律平组（172±148）min（11～608min）。结论胺碘酮在转复阵发心房颤动比心律平更加快速、安全、有效。

Objective To compare the effect of amiodaron and propafenone on the cardioversion of paroxysmal auricular fibrillation （PAF）. Methods 58 PAF （ ≤48 h） cases were radomly divide into two groups： 30 cases who accepted amiodaron 150 mg intravenous injection, and 0.6～ 1.0 mg/min intravenous drip afterwards in amiodaron group, other 28 cases who accepted propafenone 1.4～2. 0 mg/kg vein injection, and 0.28 mg/min intravenous drip afterwards in propafenone group. If propafenone was not effective, the cases in propafenone group were given amidoaron. Results The successful reversion rate was 86.7 % （26/30） in amidoaron group while 57.1% （16/28） in propafenone group（P〈0.05）. The mean time of recovering was （101 ± 95） min （6 ～508 min） in amidoaron group, while （ 172 ± 148） rain （ 11～ 608 min） in propafenone group（P〈0.05）. Conclusion It is more rapid and effective of amidoaron on the cardloversion of paroxysmal auricular fibrillation than propafenone is.