乌拉地尔、尼卡地平治疗老年高血压急症的临床疗效及安全性比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2017.06.024

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要【目的】比较乌拉地尔与尼卡地平治疗老年高血压急症的临床效果及安全性。【方法】选择2015年1月至2016年10本院收治的60例老年高血压急症患者为研究对象,按照随机分组原则将其分为乌拉地尔组和尼卡地平组,每组各30例。乌拉地尔组静脉注射12.5 mg,再予以50~200 μg/min乌拉地尔持续静滴;尼卡地平组给予静脉注射尼卡地平1 mg后,再予以10~40 μg/min持续静滴。结合患者血压变化情况适当优化、调整药物剂量,观察两组患者用药前后心率(HR)、血压变化情况及不良反应。【结果】乌拉地尔组总有效率为90.00%(27/30),尼卡地平组总有效率为93.33%(28/30),两组总有效率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。两组患者治疗10 min、20 min、30 min、60 min、120 min时SBP均显著低于治疗前,两组患者治疗60 min、120 min时DBP、HR均显著低于治疗前,差异均具有统计学意义(P＜0.05);乌拉地尔组治疗10 min、20 min、30 min、60 min、120 min时HR显著低于尼卡地平组,差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。两组患者在治疗期间均出现不同程度的口干、面红、便秘等不良反应,乌拉地尔组不良反应发生率6.7%(2/30)显著低于尼卡地平组的20.0%(6/30),组间差异具统计学差异(χ²＝18.063,P＜0.05)。【结论】乌拉地尔或尼卡地平治疗老年高血压急症患者,其临床治疗效果均良好,但乌拉地尔不良反应发生率更低,具有较好的用药安全性。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	李目

关键词 ：哌嗪类/治疗应用, 尼卡地平/治疗应用, 高血压/药物疗法, 急症, 哌嗪类/副作用

Abstract：【Objective】To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of urapidil and nicardipine in the treatment of elderly patients with essential hypertension. 【Methods】Sixty cases of elderly hypertensive patients admitted from January, 2015 to October, 2016 were selected as the study data . According to the principle of randomization, they were divided into urapidil group and nicardipine group, 30 cases in each group. Urapidil group was given intravenous injection of 12.5 mg, then given 50~200 g/min g/min urapidil continuous intravenous infusion; nicardipine group was given intravenous injection of nicardipine 1 mg, then 10~40 Mu A, continuous intravenous drip.In combination with the changes of blood pressure in patients, the dose of drugs was optimized and adjusted. The heart rate (HR), blood pressure changes and adverse reactions were observed before and after medication in two groups.【Results】The total effective rate of urapidil group was 90% (27/30), and the total effective rate was 93.33% (28/30) in the nicardipine group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). 10 min, 20 min, 30 min, 60 min and 120 min SBP of two groups of patients were significantly lower than those before treatment; 60 min, 120 min DBP and HR of two groups were significantly lower than that before treatment, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05); The HR of urapidil group was significantly lower than that of nicardipine group at 10 min, 20 min, 30 min, 60 min and 120 min, with statistical difference (P<0.05). Two groups of patients had different degrees of adverse reactions such as dry mouth, constipation, flushing during treatment, occurrence of adverse reaction rate of 6.7% (2/30) of the urapidil group was significantly lower than that of the nicardipine group (6/30 20%), with statistically significant differences between the groups (χ²=18.063,P<0.05).【Conclusion】Urapidil or nicardipine is effective in the treatment of elderly hypertensive emergencies, but the incidence of adverse events of urapidil is lower, and it has better drug safety.

Key words： Piperazines/TU Nicardipine/TU Hypertension/DT Emergencies Piperazines/AE

收稿日期: 2017-02-07

PACS:

R544.1

引用本文:

李目. 乌拉地尔、尼卡地平治疗老年高血压急症的临床疗效及安全性比较[J]. 医学临床研究, 2017, 34(6): 1119-0.
LI Mu. Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Urapidil and Nicardipine in Elderly Patients with Acute Hypertension. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RESEARCH, 2017, 34(6): 1119-0.

链接本文:

http://www.jcr.net.cn/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2017.06.024 或 http://www.jcr.net.cn/CN/Y2017/V34/I6/1119

[1] 谢云燕,秦俭.乌拉地尔和尼卡地平静脉用药对老年高血压急症患者儿茶酚胺的影响[J].心肺血管病杂志,2014,33(4):521-524.
[2] 邓一芸,吴浩.乌拉地尔与尼卡地平联合应用治疗高血压23例临床分析[J].华西医学,2009,24(3):710-711.
[3] 王涛,秦俭,王晶,等.尼卡地平和乌拉地尔治疗高血压急症的比较[J].现代生物医学进展,2011,11(21):4065-4068.
[4] Matsuzaki T, Kano T, Katayama Y,et al. Intravenous infusion of calcium antagonist nicardipine, does not increase intracranial pressure: evaluation in a rat model of transient cerebral ischemia and reperfusion [J].Neurol Res,2008,6(30):531-535.
[5] Suzuki S, Ohesuka S, Ishikawa K, et al. Effects of nicardipine on coronary, vertebral and renal arterial flows in patients with essential hypertension[J].Hypertens Res,2003,26(3):193-199.
[6] 孙书芳.小剂量乌拉地尔和硝普钠治疗高血压急症的疗效对比[J].临床合理用药,2015,8(4C):5-6.
[7] 葛均波,徐永健.内科学[M].第8版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2013.3:215-217.
[8] Hiratzka LF,Bakris GI,Beckman JA, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCIA/ SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology,American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society for Vascular Medicine[J].J Am Coll Car-diol, 2010,55(14):e27-e129.
[9] Gillon TE, Pels A, von Dadelszen P, et al. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a systematic review of international clinical practice guidelines[J].PLoS One,2014,9(12):e113715.
[10] 龚尤贵.舌下含服硝苯地平和静脉注射乌拉地尔治疗高血压急症的疗效观察[J].海南医学院学报,2012,18(1):35-37.
[11] 赵鹏,黄杨,余厚友,等.乌拉地尔与硝普钠治疗急性主动脉夹层高血压的临床研究[J].临床急诊杂志,2015,16(12):920-922.
[12] 孙青,李凌,白中乐,等.尼卡地平与硝普钠治疗高血压急症临床观察[J].医药论坛杂志,2013,34(12):118-119.
[13] Curran MP, Robinson DM, Keating GM. Intravenous nicardipine: its use in the short term treatment of hypertension and various other indications[J].Drug,2006,66(13):1755-1782.
[14] 杨志雄,余东平,杨仕光.尼卡地平和乌拉地尔对高血压脑出血术后的疗效比较[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2010,13(5):7-8.
(本文编辑:张兴珍) [收稿日期] 2017-02-07