天麻素治疗冠心病心绞痛的临床效果

Clinical effect of gastrodin in the treatment of angina pectoris of coronary heart disease

目的探讨天麻素治疗冠心病心绞痛的临床效果。方法选取2013年3月~2016年3月广州军区武汉总医院收治的冠心病心绞痛患者80例,依据治疗方法的不同将其分为两组,天麻素组（n=40）和常规组（n=40）。常规组患者接受西药治疗,包括硝酸酯类药物、钙离子拮抗剂等,2周为1个疗程;天麻素组患者在上述治疗的基础上给予患者静脉点滴6 m L天麻素注射液＋5%氯化钠或葡萄糖注射液,每天1次,2周为1个疗程。对两组患者心绞痛发作频率和持续时间、临床疗效、心电图疗效,及不良反应发生情况进行统计分析。结果天麻素组心绞痛发作频率[（1.9±0.6）次/d]显著低于常规组[（2.6±1.3）次/d]（P〈0.05）,持续时间[（4.1±3.2）min]显著短于常规组[（6.6±3.7）min]（P〈0.05）,治疗总有效率[92.5%（37/40）]显著高于常规组[72.5%（29/40）]（P〈0.05）,心电图总有效率[82.5%（33/40）]显著高于常规组[67.5%（27/40）]（P〈0.05）,但天麻素组和常规组不良反应发生率[10.0%（4/40）、7.5%（3/40）]比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论天麻素在冠心病心绞痛患者临床治疗中具有较高的应用价值,效果显著,值得推广。

Objective To investigate the clinical effect of gastrodin in the treatment of angina pectoris of coronary heart disease. Methods Eighty cases of patients with angina pectoris of coronary heart disease admitted to Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Region from March 2013 to March 2016 were selected, the patients were divided into two groups according to different treatment methods, namely gastrodin group（n = 40） and conventional group（n = 40）.The conventional group was given western medicine therapy, including nitrates, calcium antagonists, 2 weeks was as a course of treatment; based on the treatment above, the gastrodin group was given intravenous Gastrodin Injection 6 m L ＋5% Sodium Chloride or Glucose Injection, once a day, 2 weeks was as a course of treatment. Then the angina frequency and duration, clinical efficacy, electrocardiogram efficacy and adverse events of the two groups were analyzed.Results The angina frequency of gastrodin group [（1.9 ±0.6） times/d] was significantly lower than that of conventional group [（2.6±1.3） times/d]（P〈0.05）, the time of duration [（4.1±3.2） min] was significantly shorter than that of conventional group [（6.6±3.7） min]（P〈0.05）, the total effective rate of treatment [92.5%（37/40）] was significantly higher than that of conventional group [72.5%（29/40）]（P〈0.05）, the total effective rate of ECG [82.5%（33/40）] was significantly higher than that of conventional group [67.5%（27/40）]（P〈0.05）, but the difference of the incidence of adverse reactions between gastrodin group and conventional group [10.0%（4/40）, 7.5%（3/40）] was not statistically significant（P〈0.05）. Conclusion Gastrodin has higher value in the treatment of patients with angina pectoris of coronary heart disease, the effect is significant, so it is worthy of promotion.