拉莫三嗪联合丙戊酸钠治疗脑卒中后继发癫痫患者的临床疗效
|
摘要
目的:探讨拉莫三嗪联合丙戊酸钠治疗脑卒中后继发癫痫患者的临床疗效。方法:选取某院2015年1月～2017年1月接诊的120例脑卒中后继发癫痫患者进行研究,根据随机数表法,将患者均分为对照组和观察组,对照组采取单纯丙戊酸钠治疗,观察组在对照组的基础上,联合拉莫三嗪治疗。对两组患者治疗后的临床疗效,治疗前和治疗后6个月的癫痫发作次数和持续时间以及不良反应进行比较分析。结果:观察组总有效率(96.67%)明显高于对照组(85.00%),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗前,两组患者的癫痫发作次数比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后6个月,观察组癫痫发作次数(0.51±0.34次/年)明显低于对照组(1.24±0.71次/年),癫痫发作持续时间(2.26±1.14min/次)明显短于对照组(3.45±1.34min/次),两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者的不良反应发生率经比较差异不明显,无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:采用拉莫三嗪联合丙戊酸钠治疗脑卒中后继发癫痫,能够提高临床疗效,缩短癫痫的发作时间,减少不良反应的发生,值得临床上推广及应用。
Objective: To explore the clinical efficacy of lamotrigine combined with valproate in the treatment of patients with secondary epilepsy after stroke. Methods: 120 cases of patients with secondary epilepsy after stroke received in a hospital from January 2015 to January 2017 were studied. According to the random number table method, the patients were divided into the control group and the observation group. The control group was treated with sodium valproate alone, and the observation group was treated with lamotrigine on the basis of the control group. The clinical efficacy, the number and duration of seizures and adverse reactions before and 6 months after treatment were compared and analyzed between the two groups. Results: The total effective rate of the observation group(96.67%) was significantly higher than that of the control group(85%), and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P<0.05). Before treatment, there was no significant difference in the number of epileptic seizures in the two groups(P>0.05). After 6 months of treatment, the number of epileptic seizures(0.51±0.34 times/year) in the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group(1.24±0.71 times/year), and the duration of epileptic seizures(2.26±1.14 min/times) was significantly shorter than that of the control group(3.45±1.34 min/times). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion: Lamotrigine combined with sodium valproate in the treatment of secondary epilepsy after stroke can improve the clinical efficacy, shorten the seizure time and reduce the incidence of adverse reactions. It is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
Objective: To explore the clinical efficacy of lamotrigine combined with valproate in the treatment of patients with secondary epilepsy after stroke. Methods: 120 cases of patients with secondary epilepsy after stroke received in a hospital from January 2015 to January 2017 were studied. According to the random number table method, the patients were divided into the control group and the observation group. The control group was treated with sodium valproate alone, and the observation group was treated with lamotrigine on the basis of the control group. The clinical efficacy, the number and duration of seizures and adverse reactions before and 6 months after treatment were compared and analyzed between the two groups. Results: The total effective rate of the observation group(96.67%) was significantly higher than that of the control group(85%), and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P<0.05). Before treatment, there was no significant difference in the number of epileptic seizures in the two groups(P>0.05). After 6 months of treatment, the number of epileptic seizures(0.51±0.34 times/year) in the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group(1.24±0.71 times/year), and the duration of epileptic seizures(2.26±1.14 min/times) was significantly shorter than that of the control group(3.45±1.34 min/times). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion: Lamotrigine combined with sodium valproate in the treatment of secondary epilepsy after stroke can improve the clinical efficacy, shorten the seizure time and reduce the incidence of adverse reactions. It is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
引文
1 周瑾,孙玉华,韩毅.拉莫三嗪联合丙戊酸钠治疗脑卒中继发癫痫患者的疗效观察.中国实用神经疾病杂志,2017,20(1):12～15.
2 高玉娟,潘鹏克.拉莫三嗪治疗癫痫并抑郁障碍的可行性及安全性.中国医药科学,2016,6(21):87～89.
3 刘梅.醒脑静联合拉莫三嗪、丙戊酸钠治疗老年脑卒中继发性癫痫患者的疗效观察.辽宁中医杂志,2017,44(3):551～553.
4 胡雪飞,张永军,魏丽红,等.丙戊酸钠联合拉莫三嗪治疗癫痫疗效及安全性的Meta分析.中国全科医学,2017,20(29):3643～3648.
5 张小伟.脑卒中继发癫痫的相关治疗进展.医学理论与实践,2017,30(21):3161～3162.
6 韦迪岱,陈晋,郑文明.拉莫三嗪与丙戊酸钠对改善颅脑损伤后晚期癫痫疗效的比较.重庆医学,2015,44(22):3125～3126.
7 董蕊.丙戊酸纳联合拉莫三嗪治疗各型癫痫的疗效及安全性研究.当代医学,2015,21(32):133～134.
8 孙建忠.丙戊酸钠联合拉莫三嗪治疗癫痫的疗效及安全性研究.中国处方药,2016,14(10):80～81.
9 陈国俊.关于脑卒中后继发癫痫的原因、类型及治疗方法的探讨.当代医药论丛,2014,12(1):89～90.
10 聂红霞,姜建东,庄爱霞.脑卒中后继发癫痫的临床研究.中国继续医学教育,2015,7(29):87～88.
2 高玉娟,潘鹏克.拉莫三嗪治疗癫痫并抑郁障碍的可行性及安全性.中国医药科学,2016,6(21):87～89.
3 刘梅.醒脑静联合拉莫三嗪、丙戊酸钠治疗老年脑卒中继发性癫痫患者的疗效观察.辽宁中医杂志,2017,44(3):551～553.
4 胡雪飞,张永军,魏丽红,等.丙戊酸钠联合拉莫三嗪治疗癫痫疗效及安全性的Meta分析.中国全科医学,2017,20(29):3643～3648.
5 张小伟.脑卒中继发癫痫的相关治疗进展.医学理论与实践,2017,30(21):3161～3162.
6 韦迪岱,陈晋,郑文明.拉莫三嗪与丙戊酸钠对改善颅脑损伤后晚期癫痫疗效的比较.重庆医学,2015,44(22):3125～3126.
7 董蕊.丙戊酸纳联合拉莫三嗪治疗各型癫痫的疗效及安全性研究.当代医学,2015,21(32):133～134.
8 孙建忠.丙戊酸钠联合拉莫三嗪治疗癫痫的疗效及安全性研究.中国处方药,2016,14(10):80～81.
9 陈国俊.关于脑卒中后继发癫痫的原因、类型及治疗方法的探讨.当代医药论丛,2014,12(1):89～90.
10 聂红霞,姜建东,庄爱霞.脑卒中后继发癫痫的临床研究.中国继续医学教育,2015,7(29):87～88.