胺碘酮普罗帕酮西地兰治疗阵发性房颤的效果比较.docVIP

胺碘酮、普罗帕酮、西地兰治疗阵发性房颤的效果比较 　　作者：苏丹霞，唐方明，胡梅荣 作者单位：(广东省农垦中心医院， 广东湛江　524002) 　　【摘要】 目的 比较静脉应用胺碘酮、普罗帕酮、西地兰治疗阵发性房颤的效果。方法 70例阵发性房颤患者随机分成胺碘酮组(n=26)、普罗帕酮组(n=20)、西地兰组(n=24)，分别静脉推注胺碘酮150～600 mg、普罗帕酮70～210 mg、西地兰0.2～0.6 mg，观察各组房颤的转复情况、复律时间、心室率变化及药物不良反应。结果 胺碘酮组转复有效率优于普罗帕酮组和西地兰组(P0.05或0.01)。普罗帕酮组和胺碘酮组转复成功时间短于西地兰组(P0.01)，其中普罗帕酮组最短。每组治疗前、后的平均心室率差异均有统计学意义(P0.01)，胺碘酮组和普罗帕酮组治疗后的平均心室率优于西地兰组(P0.01)。结论 胺碘酮转复心律的效果优于普罗帕酮和西地兰。 　　【关键词】 心房颤动;胺碘酮;普罗帕酮;西地兰 　　Comparison of amiodarone, propafenone and cedilanid in the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation 　　SU Danxia, TANG Fangming, HU Meirong (Central Hospital of Guangdong Province Agriculture Reclamation, Zhanjiang 524002, China) 　　Abstract: Objective To compare the effect of amiodarone, propafenone and cedilanid in the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).Methods Seventy PAF patients were randomly divided into amiodarone group (n=26), propafenone group (n=20)and cedilanid group (n=24), receiving intravenous injection of amiodarone (150～600 mg), propafenone (70～210 mg)and cedilanid (0.2～0.6 mg)respectively.The cardioversion, ventricular rate and adverse reaction were recorded in all groups.Results The cardioversion rate in amiodarone group was superior to that in propafenone and cedilanid groups (P0.01 or 0.05).The cardioversion time in propafenone and amiodarone group was shorter than that in cedilanid group (P0.01), especially in propafenone group.There was a statistical difference in the average ventricular rate between before and after treatment in three groups (P0.01), but the average ventricular rate after treatment in amiodarone and propafenone groups was lower than that in cedilanid group (P0.01).Conclusion Amiodarone is more effective than propafenone and cedilanid in the cardioversion of PAF. 　　Key words: atrial fibrillation; amiodarone; propafenone; cedilanid 　　心房颤动(房颤)是临床上常见的快速型心律失常，可以引起一系列临床症状和严重并发症,如心力衰竭、血栓栓塞事件，甚至致残、死亡等。有效控制房颤，能降低致残率、病死率，延长患者生命，提高患者生活质量。目前，国内对胺碘酮、普罗帕酮、西地兰治疗阵发性房颤的效果