尿激酶和阿替普酶在急性脑梗死静脉溶栓效果对比分析  

Comparative Analysis of Urokinase and Alteplase in Intravenous Thrombolysis of Acute Cerebral Infarction

作　　者：周亚[1] ZHOU Ya(Department of Neurology,Guannan County People's Hospital,Guannan,Jiangsu Province,222500 China)

机构地区：[1]灌南县人民医院神经内科,江苏灌南222500

出　　处：《中外医疗》2020年第15期110-112,共3页China & Foreign Medical Treatment

摘　　要：目的分别采用尿激酶和阿替普酶对急性脑梗死患者进行静脉溶栓治疗,比较两种药物的临床治疗效果。方法2019年1月—2020年3月该院开展急性脑梗死患者的治疗研究,便利选择59例患者,分为尿激酶治疗组(27例患者)和阿替普酶治疗组(32例患者),对两组的临床治疗效果进行比较和分析。结果从临床治疗效果来看,阿替普酶治疗组临床治疗有效率为96.88%,而尿激酶治疗组临床治疗有效率为81.48%。两组数据对比差异有统计学意义(χ^2=7.978,P<0.05)。在治疗以后,两组的神经功能评分分别为(4.13±2.78)分和(9.02±3.53)分,阿替普酶治疗组优于尿激酶治疗组。两组的数据资料对比,差异有统计学意义(t=8.973,P<0.05)。结论在急性脑梗死的临床溶栓治疗中,采用阿替普酶的治疗效果更好,对于患者的康复与神经功能的恢复都有很好的疗效。Objective To use intravenous urokinase and alteplase to treat patients with acute cerebral infarction by intravenous thrombolysis,and to compare the clinical effects of the two drugs.Methods The hospital conducted research on the treatment of patients with acute cerebral infarction.From January 2019 to March 2020,59 patients were conveniently selected and divided into urokinase treatment group(27 patients)and alteplase treatment group(32 patients),compared and analyzed the clinical treatment effects of the two groups.Results From the perspective of clinical treatment effect,the effective rate of clinical treatment in alteplase group was 96.88%,while the effective rate of clinical treatment in urokinase group was 81.48%.The difference in data between the two groups is statistically significant(χ^2=7.978,P<0.05).After treatment,the neurological scores of the two groups were(4.13±2.78)points and(9.02±3.53)points,and the alteplase group was better than the urokinase group.The data comparison between the two groups was statistically significant(t=8.973,P<0.05).Conclusion In clinical thrombolytic therapy of acute cerebral infarction,the use of alteplase is more effective,and it has a good effect on patients'rehabilitation and neural function recovery.

关 键 词：尿激酶 阿替普酶 急性脑梗死 静脉溶栓 

分 类 号：R4[医药卫生—临床医学]