置管溶栓在下肢深静脉血栓形成治疗与传统治疗的比较

Comparison of Catheter Directed Thrombolysis with Conventional Treatment in Deep Venous Thrombosis of Lower Extremity

目的对比置管溶栓法与传统全身静脉输液法治疗下肢深静脉血栓的临床疗效.方法选择安徽省皖北煤电集团总医院自2013年6月至2014年6月收治的下肢深静脉血栓患者120例,按照自主选择的原则将其分为观察组与对照组.其中观察组为同意置管溶栓的患者,共62例;对照组为同意全身静脉输液治疗的患者,共58例.2组患者住院期间,定时测量其双下肢髌骨下缘下10 cm处的小腿周径及髌骨上缘15 cm处的大腿周径.对2组患者的周径缩小时间、周径缩小值、患肢静脉充盈时间以及血栓溶解率进行对比.结果经临床2周的治疗之后,观察组患者的周径缩小时间明显短于对照组(P<0.05),其周径缩小值缩小值明显大于对照组(P<0.05),其血栓溶解率在不同级别也明显优于对照组(P<0.05),对照组患者的患肢静脉充盈时间明显短于观察组(P<0.05),差异均具有统计学意义.结论应用置管溶栓法治疗临床下肢深静脉血栓的远期治疗效果显著优于全身静脉输液法.

Objective To study comparatively the clinical efficacy of thrombolysis method and traditional systemic intravenous infusion in treatment of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis.Methods 120 patients with lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in our hospital from 2013 June to 2014 June were selected according to the principle of independent cases and divided into the observation group and control group.The observation group were patients agreeing to be treated with catheter directed thrombolysis, a total of 62 cases, while in the control group were the patients agreeing to be treated with systemic intravenous infusion,a total of 58 cases.During the period of hospitaligation, the two groups at the edge of the 15 cm timing measurement of double lower limbs is the lower margin of the patella 10 cm leg circumference and patella on the thigh circumference.Of the two groups of patients with circumferential diameter reduced time, week diameter reducing value, limb venous filling time and thrombolytic rate were compared.Results After 2 weeks of clinical treatment, the observation group patients circumference reduced time was significantly shorter than that of the control group（P〈0.05）, the diameter shrinking value reduced significantly was lower than that of the control group（P〈0.05）,the thrombolytic rate at different levels were significantly better that of than the control group（P〈0.05）,the limb filling time of the patients in the control group was shorter than taht of the observation group（P〈0.05）, the difference was statistically significant.Conclusion The application of the therapeutic effect of tube thrombolytic therapy clinical deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremity was significantly better than the systemic intravenous infusion.