美托洛尔与硝苯地平治疗老年人无症状性心肌缺血的疗效对比

Comparison of the efficacy of metoprolol and nifedipine in the treatment of asymptomatic myocardial ischemia for the elderly

目的探讨美托洛尔与硝苯地平治疗老年人无症状性心肌缺血的临床应用价值。方法选择56例无症状性心肌缺血老年患者，随机数字表法分为美托洛尔组和硝苯地平组各28例。分析两组治疗期间并发症发生情况、治疗前后发作次数及发作时间。结果美托洛尔组与硝苯地平组患者治疗前发作次数分别为（19．6±3．2）次／周与（18．9±2．8）次／周，发作时间（5131±-352）s与（5130±348）s，差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0．05）；治疗后发作次数分别为（4．6±2．1）次／周与（7．4±2．1）次／周，发作时间（900±140）s与（1440±240）s，差异均有统计学意义（均P〈0．05）。所有患者治疗期间均能耐受，无心肌梗死病例出现。结论美托洛尔与硝苯地平对于老年人无症状性心肌缺血的治疗较为安全，美托洛尔较硝苯地平治疗效果好。

Objective To explore the clinical value of application of metoprolol and nifedipine in the treat- ment of asymptomatic myocardial ischemia for the elderly. Methods 56 cases of elderly patients with silent myocardial ischemia were chosen. They were randomly divideded into the metoprolol group of 28 cases and nifedipine group with 28 cases according to the number table. The incidence of complications during treatment in the metoprolol and nifedipine group were analyzed. The seizure frequency and onset time in the two groups of patients were compared before and after treatment. Results The onset time in the two groups, before treatment had no statistically significant difference [ the number of attacks ： （ 19.6 ± 3.2 ） times/week compared with （ 18.9 ± 2.8 ） times/week; attack time ： （ 5131 ± 352 ） s vs （ 5130 ± 348 ） s, all （ P 〉 0.05 ）. After treatment, there were statistically significant differences for the number of attacks and attack time [ the number of attacks ： （4.6 ± 2.1 ） times/week compared with （ 7.4 ± 2.1 ） times/week, onset time ： （ 900 ± 140 ） s vs （ 1440 ± 240 ） s （ all P 〈 0.05 ）. All patients can tolerate the treatment period,there was no cases of myocardial infarction occurs. Conclusion The metoprolol and nifedipine for the elderly treatment of silent myocardial ischemia was more secure, and metoprolol was more effective than nifedipine.