论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析不同强度华法林抗凝治疗老年非瓣膜病性房颤(NVAF)患者长期疗效及安全性.方法:随访5年的NVAF患者按年龄分为高龄老年组65例,年龄≥80(85.00±2.09)岁;老年组75例,年龄65~79(76.50±2.27)岁;中年组57例,年龄0.05).高龄华法林组剂量(2.85±0.49)mg,INR(2.16±0.32),CHA2DS2-VASc(2.33±0.48)分,老年华法林组剂量(2.95±0.38)mg,INR(2.20±0.28)CHA2 DS2-VASc(2.64±0.77)分,两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).中年华法林组剂量(3.29±0.49)mg,INR(2.54±0.44)CHA2 DS2-VASc(3.02±0.89)分,明显大于高龄组和老年组(P均0.05).结论:对于老年NVAF患者应用华法林抗凝治疗,如能严密监测INR,INR控制在1.6~2.5是安全有效的.“,”Objective:To analyze long-term therapeutic effect and safety of warfarin anticoagulant therapy of differ- ent intensity on aged patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Methods:According to age,a total of 197 NVAF patients followed up for five years were divided into advanced aged group [n=65,≥80 (85.00±2.09) years],aged group [n=75,65-79 (76.50±2.27)years]and middle-aged group [n=57,0.05).Compared with middle- aged group,there were significant reductions in warfarin dose [(3.29±0.49)mg/d vs.(2.95±0.38)mg/d,(2.85 ±0.49)mg/d],INR [(2.54±0.43)vs.(2.20±0.29),(2.16±0.32)]and CHA2DS2-VASc [(3.02±0.89) scores vs.(2.64±0.77)scores vs.(2.33±0.48)scores]in aged group and advanced aged group,P0.05).There were no signif- icant difference in incidence rates of mild hemorrhage (21.1% vs.14.7% vs.24.6%)and severe hemorrhage (1.8% vs.1.3% vs.1.5%)among middle-aged group,aged group and advanced aged group,P>0.05 all.Conclu-sion:When INR is closely monitored,INR controlled within 1.6-2.5 warfarin anticoagulation is safe and effective for in aged patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.