硝苯地平与阿替洛尔治疗风湿性心脏病中度二尖瓣狭窄的临床效果

Clinical effect of nifedipine and atenolol in the treatment of moderate mitral stenosis in rheumatic heart disease

目的比较硝苯地平与阿替洛尔治疗风湿性心脏病(RHD)中度二尖瓣狭窄(MS)的效果及安全性。方法选择我院收治的RHD中度MS患者94例,根据治疗方案不同将其分为硝苯地平组(口服硝苯地平)与阿替洛尔组(口服阿替洛尔),每组47例。比较两组患者的治疗效果及不良反应。结果两组治疗总有效率、不良反应总发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后,两组患者的静息心率均较治疗前下降(P<0.05),但组间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后,两组患者的LVEF、LVEDD、LVESD和E/A均优于治疗前,且硝苯地平组优于阿替洛尔组(P<0.05)。结论对于RHD中度MS患者,硝苯地平与阿替洛尔具有相似的疗效及安全性,但硝苯地平在改善心功能方面更具优势。

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of nifedipine and atenolol in the treatment of rheumatic heartdisease （RHD） with moderate mitral stenosis （MS）. Methods A total of 94 patients with moderate MS of RHD admitted inour hospital were selected and divided into nifedipine group （oral nifedipine） and atenolol group （oral atenolol）, with 47cases in each group. The treatment effects and adverse reactions of the two groups were compared. Results There was nosignificant difference in the total effective rates of treatment and total incidences of adverse reactions between the twogroups（P〉0.05）. After treatment, the resting heart rates of the two groups were lower than those before treatment（P〈0.05）,but the difference was not significant between the two groups（P〉0.05）. After treatment, LVEF, LVEDD, LVESD and E/A inthe two groups were superior to those before treatment, and those in the nifedipine group were superior to the atenolol group（P〈0.05）. Conclusion For patients with RHD moderate MS, nifedipine has similar efficacy and safety to atenolol, butnifedipine has advantages in improving cardiac function.