论文部分内容阅读
目的对比普罗帕酮与胺碘酮治疗心律失常的临床效果。方法选择2013年5月至2015年6月光山县人民医院收治的心律失常患者66例,将其随机分为对照组与治疗组,各33例。对照组口服盐酸普罗帕酮片,治疗组口服胺碘酮片。对比两组治疗效果与不良反应。结果治疗组总有效率、心率变异参数高于对照组,hs-CRP、不良反应率明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论胺碘酮较普罗帕酮治疗心律失常效果显著,可改善临床症状,减少不良反应,有效提高患者生活质量。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of propafenone and amiodarone in the treatment of arrhythmia. Methods Sixty-six patients with arrhythmia admitted to Guangshan County People’s Hospital from May 2013 to June 2015 were randomly divided into control group and treatment group, with 33 cases in each group. Control group oral propafenone hydrochloride tablets, the treatment group oral amiodarone tablets. Compare the two groups of treatment effects and adverse reactions. Results The total effective rate and the rate of heart rate variability in the treatment group were higher than those in the control group. The hs-CRP and adverse reaction rate in the treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group. The difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion Amiodarone is more effective than propafenone in the treatment of arrhythmia, which can improve clinical symptoms, reduce adverse reactions and effectively improve the quality of life of patients.