尿激酶与阿替普酶治疗脑梗死临床疗效对比

Comparison of clinical efficacy between urokinase and Alteplase in the treatment of cerebral infarction

目的对比分析尿激酶与阿替普酶治疗脑梗死的临床疗效。方法选择我院2016年6月至2017年10月收治的50例脑梗死患者为研究对象,以随机抽签法分为A组和B组各25例,B组采用尿激酶治疗,A组采用阿替普酶治疗,对两组患者治疗后2h、1d、7d的临床疗效及NIHSS评分进行观察。结果 A组治疗后2h、1d的总有效率为56.00%、64.00%,明显较B组40.00%、52.00%高(P<0.05),两组患者治疗后7d的总有效率无统计学差异(P>0.05);A组治疗后2h、1d的NIHSS评分较B组低(P<0.05),两组患者治疗前及治疗后7d的NIHSS评分无差异(P>0.05)。结论阿替普酶治疗脑梗死的疗效确切,且能改善患者神经功能,值得临床推广。

Objective To compare and analyze the clinical efficacy of urokinase and alteplase in the treatment of cerebral infarction. Methods 50 case of patients with cerebral infarction treated in our hospital from June 2016 to October 2017 were selected as the subjects. andwere divided into group A and group B by random draw method. 25 cases in each group. Group B was treated with urokinase,while group A was treated withalteplase. The clinical efficacy and NIHSS score of 2h,1D and 7d after treatment in two groups were observed. Results After treatment,the total effective rate of 2H and 1D in group A was 56% and 64%,which was significantly higher than that in group B 40. 00%、52. 00%( P < 0. 05). There was no significant difference in the total effective rate of 7D between the two groups after treatment ( P > 0. 05). After treatment, the NIHSS scores of 2H and 1D in group A were lower than those in group B ( P < 0. 05). There was no significant difference in the NIHSS score of 7D between the two groups before and after treatment ( P > 0. 05). Conclusion The effect of the treatment of cerebral infarction with the treatment of alteplase is accurate,and can improve the neurological function of patients. It is worthy of clinical promotion.