目的：评价在急诊抢救时对心脏骤停及严重缓慢性心律失常实施体外无创性临时心脏起搏的临床效果。方法对2008年1月-2013年12月在我急诊科抢救的83例心脏骤停患者、45例缓慢性心律失常患者根据当时疾病的严重程度及不同医生的治疗观点分为二组：A 组：实施体外无创性临时心脏起搏结合药物治疗；B 组：常规药物治疗。治疗期间严密观察心电监护，心跳，血压，统计比较两组恢复正常心跳的成功率。结果通过临床观察对比统计，A 组：心脏骤停及缓慢性心律失常病例中恢复心跳分别为36例（85.7％）和23例（100％）。B 组：心脏骤停及缓慢性心律失常病例中恢复心跳分别为23例（56.1％）和15例（68.1％）。A 组恢复正常心跳成功率较 B 组高。结论在急诊抢救领域中对心脏骤停及严重缓慢性心律失常患者实施体外起搏的临床疗效较好，抢救成功率高，并且使用安全、简便、快捷是治疗缓慢性心律失常、预防和抢救心脏骤停的好手段，值得在临床急救推广使用。%Objective To evaluate clinic effect in the emergency rescue of sudden cardiac arrest and severe tardy ar-rhythmia in vitro noninvasive temporary cardiac pacemaker. Methods January 2008 -December 201 3 in emergency rescue of 83 patients with cardiac arrest,45 cases of tardy arrhythmia patients were divided into two groups:Group A:In vitro non-inva-sive temporary pacemaker combined with drug therapy;Group B:Routine drug therapy.Closely observe the ECG monitoring dur-ing treatment,heart rate,blood pressure,statistical comparison of two groups of normal heart rate. Results By compared with clinical observation statistics,Group A:36 cases was cardiac arrest and tardy arrhythmia cases heart back,85.7%,and 23 cases was accounting for 1 00%.Group B:Cardiac arrest and tardy arrhythmia cases to restore the heart of 23 cases accounting was for 56.1 % and 1 5 cases,accounting for 68.1 %,respectively.Group A normal heart rate higher than group B. Conclu-sion In emergency rescue,clinical effect of patients with cardiac arrest and severe tardy arrhythmia in vitro pacemaker were bet-ter,rescuing success rate was higher,safe,and easy to use,is worth popularizing in clinical emergency use.
展开▼
