论文部分内容阅读
【目的】探讨法舒地尔与尼莫地平不同给药途径对脑动脉瘤栓塞术后发生脑血管痉挛的防治价值。【方法】收集自2010年1月至2014年1月本院脑动脉瘤栓塞术后患者74例，随机分为两组，每组37例。对照组患者术中使用尼莫地平静脉滴注扩脑血管，观察组患者经动脉微导管推注法舒地尔进行扩血管治疗。比较两组患者脑脊液S100蛋白和血清神经元特异性烯醇化酶（NSE）变化，采用格拉斯哥预后评分评价治疗效果，比较两组患者的不良反应发生情况。【结果】两组患者治疗后脑脊液S100蛋白以及血清NSE均显著高于治疗前（ P ＜0．05），治疗后尼莫地平组脑脊液S100蛋白以及血清NSE均显著高于法舒地尔组，且两组相比较差异有显著性（ P ＜0．05）。两组均无死亡病例，法舒地尔组总有效率（91．9％）显著高于尼莫地平组（75．7％）（ P ＜0．05）。法舒地尔组不良反应发生率显著低于尼莫地平组（18．9％ vs 43．2％，P＜0．05）。【结论】法舒地尔与尼莫地平都具有缓解脑血管痉挛的效果，能有效减少脑血管痉挛的发生，减少脑损伤，且法舒地尔预防和治疗脑血管痉挛的效果优于尼莫地平。“,”[Objective] To explore the protective effect of fasudil and nimodipine on cerebral vasospasm after aneu‐rysm embolization so as to provide clinical rationales .[Methods]A total of 74 patients were collected from January 2010 to January 2014 and randomly divided into control and case groups ( n=37 each) .Control group received an intravenous infusion of nimodipine while case group fasudil via a micro‐catheter .The expressions of S100 protein and serum neuron specific enolase were measured before and after intervention for two groups .The outcome of Glasgow score was used to e‐valuate the therapeutic efficacies .[Results] The expressions of S100 and NSE after intervention were significantly higher than those before intervention ( P <0 .05) .The expressions of cerebrospinal fluid S100 and NSE of nimodipine group were significantly higher than those of fasudil group ( P<0 .05) .Neither group had mortality .The overall success rate of fasudil group was significantly higher than that of nimodipine group (91 .9% vs 75 .7% ) ( P <0 .05) .And the inci‐dence of adverse reactions was 18 .9% in case group versus 43 .2% in control group .And there was significant difference .[Conclusion] Fasudil offers better efficacies than nimodipine in the prevention and treatment of cerebral vasospasm .