Objective To compare and analyze the clinical efficacy of norepinephrine and pituitrin in the treatment of infectious shock .Methods 80 selected patients were randomly divided into two groups , The test group was given pituitrin based on conventional therapy , was given pituitrin based on conventional therapy , the control group was given norepinephrine based on conventional therapy , changes of blood lactic acid ( BLA) level of two groups after treatment were compared .Results After treatment , the BLA level of the test group was significantly lower than control group;resuscitation successful rate within 6h of study group (85.0%) was higher than control group (52.5%); and the MODS incidence of the test group was 22.5%, lower than control group (47.5%), differences between two groups were statistically significant ( P <0.05).In the test group, the mechanical ventilation support time was (6.8 ±1.0) d, which was lower than control group (14.9 ±2.6) d;hospital stays in ICU was (9.6 ±1.2) d, while of control group was (16.2 ±4.8) d, differences between two groups were statistically significant ( P <0.05).Conclusions The clinical efficacy of pituitrin is better than norepinephrine in the treatment of infectious shock , it can improve the histanoxia status , shorten the mechanical ventilation support time , help patients recover soon , at the same time, still need further studies to confirm .%目的：对比分析去甲肾上腺素与垂体后叶素治疗感染性休克的临床疗效。方法80例纳入患者随机分为两组，试验组在常规治疗基础上应用垂体后叶素，对照组在常规治疗基础上应用去甲肾上腺素治疗；比较两组治疗后血乳酸水平变化等。结果试验组患者治疗后血乳酸水平均显著低于对照组；试验组患者6 h内复苏成功率为85．0％，高于对照组（52．5％），MODS发生率为22．5％，低于对照组（47．5％），差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。试验组机械通气支持时间为（6．8±1．0）d，对照组机械通气支持时间为（14．9±2．6）d；ICU住院时间为（9．6±1．2）d，对照组ICU住院时间为（16．2±4．8）d，两组比较差异均有统计学意义（ P＜0．05）。结论垂体后叶素治疗感染性休克临床效果优于去甲肾上腺素，其可有效改善组织缺氧状态，缩短患者机械通气支持的时间，并促进患者早期康复出院，同时仍需今后进一步的研究加以证实。
展开▼
