介入治疗老年冠心病患者的远期预后探究
|
摘要
目的探讨介入治疗老年冠心病患者的远期预后影响。方法选取该院心内科收治的80例老年冠心病患者作为研究对象,按治疗方法不同分为两组(n=40),对照组实施药物治疗,研究组介入治疗,对比两组患者术前的一般情况,通过电话和门诊对患者进行不良事件发生率的随访。结果两组患者的单支病变、双支病变和多支病变差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。对照组的再次住院、再发心律失常分别为32.5%、27.5%,均显著高于研究组(7.5%、7.5%)(χ2=7.813,5.541,P<0.05);研究组的无事件生存50.0%显著高于对照组12.5%(χ2=13.091,P<0.05);两组患者的非致命性心肌梗死、心源性猝死差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论介入治疗老年冠心病患者的远期预后影响是积极有效的,能降低患者的再次住院和心律失常,并能提高患者的无事件生存率,值得在临床上推广。
Objective To investigate the long-term prognostic effects of interventional therapy for elderly patients with coronary heart disease. Methods Eighty elderly patients with coronary heart disease admitted to our hospital were enrolled in the study. They were divided into two groups according to different treatment methods(n =40). The control group received drug therapy, the study group received interventional therapy, and the two groups were compared before surgery. In general, patients were followed up for adverse events by telephone and clinic. Results The single-vessel disease, double-vessel disease and multi-vessel disease were significantly different between the two groups(P<0.05).The re-hospitalization and recurrent arrhythmia in the control group were 32.5% and 27.5%, respectively, which were significantly higher than the study group(7.5%, 7.5%)(χ2=7.813, 5.541, P<0.05); the event-free survival of the study group 50.0% was significantly higher than the control group of 12.5%(χ2=13.091, P<0.05). There was no significant difference in non-fatal myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion The long-term prognostic effect of interventional therapy for elderly patients with coronary heart disease is positive and effective, can reduce the patient's re-hospitalization and arrhythmia, and can improve the patient's event-free survival rate, which is worthy of clinical promotion.
Objective To investigate the long-term prognostic effects of interventional therapy for elderly patients with coronary heart disease. Methods Eighty elderly patients with coronary heart disease admitted to our hospital were enrolled in the study. They were divided into two groups according to different treatment methods(n =40). The control group received drug therapy, the study group received interventional therapy, and the two groups were compared before surgery. In general, patients were followed up for adverse events by telephone and clinic. Results The single-vessel disease, double-vessel disease and multi-vessel disease were significantly different between the two groups(P<0.05).The re-hospitalization and recurrent arrhythmia in the control group were 32.5% and 27.5%, respectively, which were significantly higher than the study group(7.5%, 7.5%)(χ2=7.813, 5.541, P<0.05); the event-free survival of the study group 50.0% was significantly higher than the control group of 12.5%(χ2=13.091, P<0.05). There was no significant difference in non-fatal myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion The long-term prognostic effect of interventional therapy for elderly patients with coronary heart disease is positive and effective, can reduce the patient's re-hospitalization and arrhythmia, and can improve the patient's event-free survival rate, which is worthy of clinical promotion.
引文
[1]李效宇.老年冠心病患者介入治疗的远期预后及危险因素研究[J].中国继续医学教育,2015(19):27-28.
[2]西来甫克孜·木合塔尔.年龄≥75岁的高龄老年人冠状动脉左主干病变介入治疗远期预后研究[D].天津:南开大学,2016.
[3]孙鑫.老年高龄冠心病患者经冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的长期预后分析[J].中国医药指南,2018,16(21):133-134.
[4]王盛尧.冠脉造影SYNTAX积分对老年冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗预后的预测效果[J].中国医药导报,2016,13(2):121-124.
[5]李全,玉献鹏,潘昱,等.冠心病患者介入治疗后病变特点与远期预后的关系[J].心肺血管病杂志,2016,35(9):696-699.
[6]张冬梅.不同途径介入治疗对高龄冠心病患者近期和远期预后影响的研究[J].河北医药,2016,38(17):2598-2600.
[7]张亮.高龄冠心病患者介入治疗策略比较及远期预后分析[D].解放军总医院;解放军医学院;军医进修学院;军医进修学院解放军总医院,2012.
[8]周学中,王惠,罗太阳.经皮冠脉介入治疗老年冠心病患者的预后及其影响因素[J].江苏大学学报:医学版,2018,28(6):512-515.
[9]黄正林,高月,张海波,等.氯吡格雷抵抗对老年冠心病合并糖尿病患者冠状动脉介入治疗预后的影响及危险因素分析[J].中国循证心血管医学杂志,2017,9(10):1226-1228.
[10]朱晓阳,连亦田.对老年冠心病患者进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的效果探析[J].当代医药论丛,2018,16(13):62-63.
[11]相琳,罗丹,杨伟,等.高龄冠心病患者介入治疗远期预后分析[J].中华老年心脑血管病杂志,2018,20(3):247-249.
[12]李春镭,方文云,吴婷.老年冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入术后近期预后及其相关影响因素分析[J].中国慢性病预防与控制,2018,26(9):680-682.
[2]西来甫克孜·木合塔尔.年龄≥75岁的高龄老年人冠状动脉左主干病变介入治疗远期预后研究[D].天津:南开大学,2016.
[3]孙鑫.老年高龄冠心病患者经冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的长期预后分析[J].中国医药指南,2018,16(21):133-134.
[4]王盛尧.冠脉造影SYNTAX积分对老年冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗预后的预测效果[J].中国医药导报,2016,13(2):121-124.
[5]李全,玉献鹏,潘昱,等.冠心病患者介入治疗后病变特点与远期预后的关系[J].心肺血管病杂志,2016,35(9):696-699.
[6]张冬梅.不同途径介入治疗对高龄冠心病患者近期和远期预后影响的研究[J].河北医药,2016,38(17):2598-2600.
[7]张亮.高龄冠心病患者介入治疗策略比较及远期预后分析[D].解放军总医院;解放军医学院;军医进修学院;军医进修学院解放军总医院,2012.
[8]周学中,王惠,罗太阳.经皮冠脉介入治疗老年冠心病患者的预后及其影响因素[J].江苏大学学报:医学版,2018,28(6):512-515.
[9]黄正林,高月,张海波,等.氯吡格雷抵抗对老年冠心病合并糖尿病患者冠状动脉介入治疗预后的影响及危险因素分析[J].中国循证心血管医学杂志,2017,9(10):1226-1228.
[10]朱晓阳,连亦田.对老年冠心病患者进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的效果探析[J].当代医药论丛,2018,16(13):62-63.
[11]相琳,罗丹,杨伟,等.高龄冠心病患者介入治疗远期预后分析[J].中华老年心脑血管病杂志,2018,20(3):247-249.
[12]李春镭,方文云,吴婷.老年冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入术后近期预后及其相关影响因素分析[J].中国慢性病预防与控制,2018,26(9):680-682.