论文部分内容阅读
目的比较持续性房颤电复律后应用索他洛尔、比索洛尔维持窦性心律的疗效及安全性。方法1999-01~2001-01以持续性房颤在我院住院且病历资料完整的患者116例,成功电复律后配对随机进入索他洛尔组和比索洛尔组。随访1 a,每半月检测一次心电图,临床观察终点为房颤复发。结果索他洛尔组63.1%、比索洛尔组56.9%在随访的1 a中维持着窦性心律,差异无显著性(P>0.05);两组房颤的复发时间分别为51±87 d4、6±89 d,差异无显著性(P>0.05);比索洛尔组未出现室速,索他洛尔组3.4%发生了尖端扭转性室速,且都发生在首次用药的24 h内。结论持续性房颤转复窦性心律后服用比索洛尔(5 mg/d)与索他洛尔(160 mg/d)都可有效地维持窦性心律,但比索洛尔更安全。
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of sotalol and bisoprolol in maintaining sinus rhythm after continuous cardioversion. Methods From January 1999 to January 2001, 116 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation were hospitalized in our hospital and their medical records were complete. The patients were randomized into sotalol group and bisoprolol group after successful cardioversion. Follow-up 1 a, half an examination of ECG, the clinical observation of atrial fibrillation recurrence. Results There were 63.1% in sotalol group and 56.9% in bisoprolol group. Sinus rhythm was maintained at 1 year after follow-up, with no significant difference (P> 0.05). The recurrence time of atrial fibrillation was 51 ± 87 d4 , 6 ± 89 d, no significant difference was found (P> 0.05). No ventricular tachycardia occurred in the bisoprolol group, and torsades de pointes occurred in 3.4% of the sotalol group, all of which occurred within 24 h . CONCLUSION: Bisoprolol (5 mg / d) and sotalol (160 mg / d) can both maintain sinus rhythm effectively after the sinus rhythm of persistent atrial fibrillation is reversed, but bisoprolol is safer.