急性非ST段抬高心肌梗死合并糖尿病患者药物与介入治疗临床疗效比较

Clinical curative effect comparison of interventional and drug therapy in the treatment of non ST-segment acute myocardial infarction patients with DM

目的对比分析急性非ST段抬高心肌梗死(NSTEMI)合并糖尿病患者药物治疗与介入治疗的临床疗效。方法对131例首次诊为NSTAMI同时既往合并2型糖尿病患者资料进行回顾性分析,比较药物治疗组和介入治疗组的临床疗效。结果介入治疗组住院期间患者再发心绞痛及新发心力衰竭的发生率低于药物治疗组(23vs4,30vs10;x^2=8.79,5.19;P<0.05),而恶性心律失常及死亡的发生率两组比较无统计学意义(1vs1,1vs1;x^2=0.18,0.18;P>0.05),随访6个月两组心绞痛发作、再发心肌梗死、新发心力衰竭等不良事件发生率相似,无明显统计学差异(30vs21,29vs20,13vs9,2vs1;x^2=0.08,0.02,0.02,0.14;P>0.05)。结论介入治疗可改善合并2型糖尿病的NSTAMI患者住院期间临床症状,但介入和药物治疗对于6个月预后的影响无明显差异。

Objective To compare the clinical effect of interventional and drug therapy in the treatment of non STsegment acute myocardial infarction（NSTEMI） patients with diabetes mellitus（DM）. Methods The clinical date of 131 cases first diagnosed as NSTEMI with DM were analyzed retrospectively, and the clinical effect of interventional therapy and drug therapy were compared. Results The incidence of recurrence in patients with angina pectoris and new heart failure of the interventional therapy group during their hospitalization was lower than that of the drug therapy group（23vs4, 30vs10; χ^2 =8.79, 5.19; P〈0.05）, but the difference of the incidence of malignant arrhythmia and death in the two groups was not significant（1vs1, 1vs1; χ^2 =0.18, 0.18; P〉0.05）. The incidence of adverse events in the two groups followed up for 6 months were no significant statistical difference（30vs21, 29vs20, 13vs9, 2vs1; χ^2=0.08, 0.02, 0.02, 0.14; P〈0.05）. Conclusion For NSTEMI patients with diabetes mellitus, intervention therapy can significantly improve clinical symptoms during the patients＇ hospitalization, but has no significant different influence on 6 months prognosis.