论文部分内容阅读
验证急性心肌梗死 (AMI) 12 0 -CCU模式院前溶栓治疗能缩短发病—溶栓时间 ,提高溶栓治疗的疗效。方法 前瞻性对比 1999年 1～ 6月期间 12 0 -CCU模式院前溶栓治疗组 (A组 )、急诊室 -CCU模式院内溶栓治疗组 (B组 )发病—溶栓时间延迟及临床疗效。结果 A组 2 1例 ,B组 2 3例。两组患者发病—就诊时间相似 (2 5± 1 9hvs 3 0± 2 7h ,P >0 0 5 ) ,但A组就诊—溶栓时间缩短 1 3h(0 8± 0 5hvs 2 1± 1 5h ,P <0 0 5 ) ,发病—溶栓时间缩短 1 9h(3 2± 1 9hvs 5 1±2 6h ,P <0 0 5 )。虽然A组心梗史 ,发病时出现严重血流动力学障碍的比例高于B组 ,但两组死亡率相似 (4 8%vs 4 3% ,P>0 0 5 )。结论 AMI 12 0 -CCU模式院前溶栓治疗可能提高溶栓疗效
To verify the acute myocardial infarction (AMI) 12 0 -CCU model of pre-hospital thrombolytic therapy can shorten the incidence of - thrombolytic time and improve the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy. Methods Prospectively compare the onset-to-thrombolytic time delay and clinical efficacy of 140-thrombolytic therapy group (A group) and emergency room-CCU-type inpatient thrombolysis group (B group) between January and June of 1999. . Results A group of 21 cases, B group 23 cases. The incidence of the two groups was similar to that of the treatment (25 ± 19 h vs 30 ± 27 h, P> 0.05), but the time of treatment-thrombolysis in group A was shortened by 13 h (0 8 ± 0 5 hvs 2 1 ± 1 5 h, P <0.05). The onset-thrombolysis time was shortened by 19 hours (32 ± 19 h vs 51 ± 2 6 h, P <0 05). Although the history of MI in group A was higher than that in group B, the incidence of severe hemodynamic disorders was higher in group A than in group B (48% vs 43%, P> 0.05). Conclusion AMI12 0 -CCU model of pre-hospital thrombolytic therapy may improve thrombolytic efficacy