摘要
目的比较西地兰和乌拉地尔治疗急性左心衰竭的临床疗效。方法选择50例患者,随机分为西地兰治疗组和乌拉地尔治疗组,监测用药前后患者的血压、心率、呼吸、血气变化,记录病情好转时间、住院日、有效率、病死率、不良反应。结果两组均能有效改善急性左心衰患者血压、心率、呼吸、血气变化,降低血压、减慢心率、改善心衰,两组间对比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但是乌拉地尔能更快缓解急性左心衰(P<0.05)。结论静滴乌拉地尔治疗急性左心衰起效更快,血液动力学方面需要进一步实验证明。
Objective Compare clinical efficacy of eedilanid and urapidil in the treatment of acute left heart failure. Methods 50 patients were randomly divided into eedilanid treatment group and urapidil treatment group, we monitor blood pressure, heart rate, respiration, blood gas changes, record got better time, length of stay, efficiency, mortality, adverse reaction before and after treatment. Results The results improve blood pressure, heart rate, respiration, blood gas in both groups of patients with acute left heart failure, lower blood pressure, heart rate, improve heart failure. Between the two groups there was no significant difference （ P 〉 0. 05 ）, but urapidil relief of acute left heart failure faster （ P 〈 0. 05 ）. Conclusion Intravenous urapidil treatment of acute left heart failure can change the failure faster, and hemodynamics tests need to be further proof.
出处
《中国医学创新》
CAS
2011年第13期11-13,共3页
Medical Innovation of China
