论文部分内容阅读
目的比较依地酸二钠钙肌肉注射和静脉滴注两种驱铅治疗方案的疗效差异,为驱铅治疗研究提供科学数据。方法采用回顾性队列研究,选择治愈的273例工人为研究对象,以疗程、住院天数和第1疗程第1d尿铅排量为判断疗效的指标,比较依地酸二钠钙肌肉注射和静脉滴注的疗效差异。结果静脉滴注组治疗效果优于肌肉注射组,表现为可缩短住院疗程和住院天数,症状、体征改善好,尿铅排出量明显高于肌肉注射组。结论血铅超标工人驱铅治疗建议采用依地酸二钠钙静脉滴注治疗方案。
Objective To compare the curative effects of two kinds of lead-removing regimens of intramuscular and intra-arterial injection of edetate disodium, and provide scientific data for the study of lead-removing therapy. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted to select 273 workers who were cured. The duration of hospitalization, days of hospitalization and lead excretion on the first day of treatment were used as indexes to evaluate the efficacy of edetate calcium intramuscular injection and intravenous infusion Note the difference in efficacy. Results Intravenous drip treatment group was better than intramuscular injection group, manifested as shortening hospital stay and hospital stay, symptoms and signs improved, urinary lead excretion was significantly higher than the intramuscular injection group. Conclusion Excessive blood lead workers lead-removing treatment recommended calcium edetate disodium calcium infusion treatment.