对比分析急诊经皮冠脉介入术与溶栓对急性心肌梗塞的疗效

摘要

Objective To Compare the efficacy of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and Intravenous Coronary Thrombolysis (IVCT) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI).Methods 65 cases of AMI patients were chosen, among which 28 cases undergoing PCI as PCI group,37 cases received IVCT as IVCT group. The effcacy and prognosis of two groups were compared and analyzed.ResultsThe PCI group and IVCT group’s patency rate(96.4%vs78.4%), mortality rate (3.6%vs10.8%), postoperative LVEF level [(65.2±7.5)%vs (51.3±11.4%)], remedial PCI treatment (0%vs10.8%), were compared to signiifcant difference (P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in two groups had no differences (P>0.05).ConclusionCompared with IVCT, PCI has a significant effect in treatment of AMI, which improves the patency rate and reduces the mortality rate.%目的对比分析急诊经皮冠脉介入术（PCI）与静脉溶栓（IVCT）对急性心肌梗死（AMI）的治疗效果。方法65例急性心肌梗死患者中将接受经皮冠脉介入术治疗患者28例作为介入组；接受溶栓治疗患者37例，作为溶栓组。对比分析两组患者的疗效和预后。结果介入组与溶栓组血管开通率（96.4%vs 78.4%）、病死率低（3.6%vs 10.8%）、术后LVEF水平[（65.2±7.5）%vs（51.3±11.4）%]、补救性PCI治疗（0%vs 10.8%）进行比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；两组不良反应发生率之间相比，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论与静脉溶栓相比，急诊经皮冠脉介入术治疗急性心肌梗塞疗效显著，提高了血管再开通比率，降低死亡率的发生。