摘要
目的:探讨依布利特及胺碘酮用于心房颤动、心房扑动转复的效果差异。方法:将63例房扑及60例房颤患者各随机分为二组,分别应用依布利特及胺碘酮治疗,转复为有效,未转复为无效。结果:依布利特对于房扑的转复率与胺碘酮对比有统计学意义(76.67%vs.27.27%,P<0.05),但对于房颤的转复依布利特与胺碘酮无差别(66.67%vs.48.15%,P>0.05);因此,依布利特转复房扑的成功率高于房颤。结论:依布利特转复房扑优于胺碘酮,其对房扑的转复成功率高于房颤。
Objective:To investigate the according to Britt and amiodarone for atrial fibrillation,atrial flutter cardioversion of difference.Methods:63 cases of atrial flutter and60 patients with atrial fibrillation patients each were randomly divided into two groups,respectively,used by Britt and amiodarone therapy,changed to effective,was not changed to invalid.Results:according to Britt for the AFL 's conversion rate and amiodarone compared with statistical significance(76.67% vs.27.27%,P0.05),but for atrial fibrillation cardioversion in Britt and amiodarone indifference(66.67% vs.48.15%,P0.05);therefore,according to Britt cardioversion of atrial flutter in the success rate is higher than that of atrial fibrillation.Conclusion:according to Britt the cardioversion of atrial flutter is superior to amiodarone,the flutter cardioversion success rate is higher than that of atrial fibrillation.
出处
《求医问药(下半月刊)》
2012年第6期470-470,共1页
Seek Medical and Ask The Medicine
关键词
房扑
房颤
依布利特
胺碘酮
atrial flutter
atrial fibrillation
according to Britt
amiodarone