三种不同止血方法对消化性溃疡出血的疗效比较

Research on Clinical Efficacy of Three Different Hemostatic Methods on Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

目的研究不同的止血方法对消化性溃疡出血的治疗效果。方法选取我院门诊及住院部收治的90例消化性溃疡出血的患者为研究对象,将其按照治疗方式的不同分为3组,其中A组患者行止血药物注射治疗,B组患者行止血钳钳夹止血治疗,C组患者行电凝止血治疗;分析比较3组患者的止血效果。结果 A组患者在血管显露、渗出性出血、喷血性出血治疗的总有效率分别为100.0%、100.0%、88.89%;B组患者在血管显露、渗出性出血、喷血性出血治疗的总有效率分别为90.0%、80.0%、100.0%;C组患者在血管显露、渗出性出血、喷血性出血治疗的总有效率分别为66.67%、100.0%、50.0%。总不良反应率A组为86.67%,B组为26.67%,C组为23.33%。结论临床上对消化性溃疡出血进行治疗时,应根据患者的病情及出血情况选择合适的治疗方式,有助于迅速有效的止血,促进病情转归。

Objective To look into the efficacy of different methods of hemostasis on peptic ulcer bleeding. Methods 90 patients of peptic ulcer hemorrhage admitted by the outpatient service and the inpatient department of this department were subjected as research subjects,and they were divided into 3 groups according to different methods of treatment,patients in Group A were subject to hemostatic medicine injection treatment,patients in Group B were subject to hemostatic treatment of hemostatic forceps clamp,and patients in Group C were subject to electrocautery treatment. Hemostatic efficacy of patients in three groups was compared. Results The total effective rate of patients from Group A in blood vessel expose,exudative bleeding and spray hemorrhagic bleeding treatment hit 100. 0%,100. 0% and 100. 0% respectively. The total effective rate of patients from Group B in blood vessel expose,exudative bleeding and spray hemorrhagic bleeding treatment hit 90. 0%,80. 0% and 100. 0% respectively. The total effective rate of patients from Group C in blood vessel expose,exudative bleeding and spray hemorrhagic bleeding treatment hit 66. 67%,100. 0% and 50. 0%respectively. The total rate of adverse reaction of patients from Group A,Group B and group C hit 86. 67%,26. 67% and 23. 33% respectively. Conclusion Disease conditions of bleeding of patients should be followed when peptic ulcer bleeding is treated clinically to select appropriate treatment,helping to quick and effective bleeding stop and promoting the relief of disease.