尼莫地平联合依达拉奉治疗老年急性脑梗死的临床效果

Clinical efficacy of nimodipine combined with edaravone in treatment of acute cerebral infarction in the elderly

摘要:

目的 分析尼莫地平联合依达拉奉对老年急性脑梗死的治疗效果。方法 入选2017年4月至2018年10月重庆三峡中心医院神经内科老年急性脑梗死患者96例,随机数表法分为研究组和对照组,每组48例。对照组采用尼莫地平治疗,研究组采用尼莫地平联合依达拉奉治疗,对比2组患者临床疗效、美国国立卫生研究院脑卒中量表(NIHSS)评分、氧合血红蛋白(HbO₂)、还原血红蛋白(Hb)、脉搏血氧饱和度(SpO₂)、总血红蛋白(HbT)指标以及氧化应激反应指标超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)、丙二醛(MDA)、超敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)水平和不良反应。应用SPSS 22.0统计软件对数据进行分析。组间比较采用t检验或χ²检验。结果 研究组总有效率高于对照组[95.83%(46/48) vs 75.00%(36/48)],差异有统计学意义(χ²=12.080,P=0.001)。研究组治疗后相比对照组HbO₂[(4.16±0.57)% vs(3.26±0.46)%]、SpO₂[(66.32±5.51)% vs(59.64±4.93)%]和HbT[(4.48±0.86) vs(3.62±0.88)g/L]明显增高,Hb[(0.42±0.16) vs(0.56±0.22)g/L]、SOD[(42.65±6.88) vs(48.56±8.09)U/ml]、MDA[(2.28±0.58) vs (3.78±0.85)mmol/L]、hs-CRP[(8.12±2.04) vs(12.87±4.26)mg/L] 和NIHSS评分[(13.13±5.74) vs(18.92±4.60)]降低,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。研究组相比对照组不良反应发生率低,差异有统计学意义[16.67%(8/48) vs 39.58%(18/48),χ²=6.235,P=0.013]。结论 尼莫地平联合依达拉奉治疗老年急性脑梗死患者临床效果显著。

Abstract:

Objective To analyze the efficacy of nimodipine combined with edaravone in the treatment of the elderly patients with acute cerebral infarction. Methods From April 2017 to October 2018,6 elderly patients with acute cerebral infarction admitted in our department were recruited, and then randomly divided into study group (n=48) and control group (n=48). The control group was treated with nimodipine and the study group was treated with nimodipine combined with edaravone. The clinical efficacy; score of the National Institutes of Health Stroke scale (NIHSS); blood oxygen indices, such as, oxyhemoglobin (HbO₂), hemoglobin (Hb), pulse oxygen saturation (SpO₂), total hemoglobin (HbT), and oxidative stress response indices, including superoxide dismutase (SOD), malondialdehyde (MDA), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the 2 groups. SPSS statistics 22.0 was used for data analysis. Student′s t test or Chi-square test was employed for the com-parison between groups. Results The total effective rate was statistically higher in the study group than in the control group [95.83%(46/48) vs 75.00%(36/48), χ²=12.080, P＝0.001]. After treatment, the study group had significantly higher HbO₂ [(4.16±0.57)% vs (3.26±0.46)%], SpO₂ [(66.32±5.51)% vs (59.64±4.93)%] and HbT [(4.48±0.86) vs (3.62±0.88)g/L], and obviously lower Hb [(0.42±0.16) vs (0.56±0.22)g/L], SOD [(42.65±6.88) vs (48.56±8.09)U/ml],MDA [(2.28±0.58) vs (3.78±0.85)mmol/L], hs-CRP [(8.12±2.04) vs (12.87±4.26)mg/L] and NIHSS score [(13.13±5.74) vs (18.92±4.60)] when compared with the control group (all P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions was lower in the study group than in the control group [16.67%(8/48) vs 39.58%(18/48), χ²=6.235, P=0.013]. Conclusion Nimodipine combined with edaravone is effective in the treatment of elderly patients with acute cerebral infarction.