| Objective:This case study retrospectively collected the patients who used rt-PA and UK thrombolysis in the cerebrovascular Hospital of Xianyang Hospital of Yan’an University from January 2020 to January 2021,and conducted a comparative study on the two thrombolytic drugs,so as to provide a scientific basis for the correct use of thrombolytic drugs in clinical use.Methods:Patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent thrombolysis in the cerebrovascular Hospital of Xianyang Hospital of Yan’an University from January 2020 to January 2021 were retrospectively collected.183 patients were finally included in the study according to the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria,Among them,82 patients with UK and 101 patients with rt-PA were included.The number of patients with NIHSS score ≥ 4 at 7 days after thrombolysis,the number of patients with good prognosis at 90days(MRS score ≤ 2),D-D,FDP,PT,TT,APTT and complications after thrombolysis in the two groups were statistically analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the two thrombolytic drugs.Results:1.This study included 183 patients with thrombolysis,including 82 patients in group UK and 101 patients in group rt-PA.There were no statistical differences in gender,age,blood pressure,coronary heart disease,diabetes,hyperlipidemia,smoking,drinking,onset time,BMI,D-D,FDP,PT,TT,APTT,pre thrombolysis NIHSS score and modified Rankin score in two groups(P>0.05).2.The prognosis of the two groups was good 90 days after thrombolysis(MRS score≤ 2),including 57(69.5%)cases in UK group and 78(77.2%)cases in rt-PA group.There was no significant difference between the two groups(P > 0.05).There were 69(84.0%)cases in UK group and 84(83.2%)cases in rt-PA group.There was no significant difference between the two groups(P > 0.05).3.The changes of D-D,FDP,PT,TT and APTT before and after thrombolysis in the two groups were observed and studied.There was no significant difference between the two groups(P > 0.05).The risk of hemorrhage after thrombolysis was compared between the two groups.In UK group,there were 4(4.9%)cases of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage,5(6.1%)cases of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and 4(4.9%)cases of extracranial hemorrhage.The total bleeding rate was 13(15.9%);In RT PA group,there were 6 cases of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage(5.9%),4 cases of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage(4.0%),7 cases of extracranial hemorrhage(6.9%),and the total bleeding rate was 17(16.8%).There was no significant difference between the two groups(P > 0.05).Comparison of adverse events after thrombolysis between the two groups(except bleeding symptoms),there were 10(12.2%)adverse events in UK group,including 2(2.4%)cases of fever,1(1.2%)case of rash,5(6.1%)cases of arrhythmia,2(2.5%)cases of nausea and vomiting,;There were 3(3.0%)adverse events in RT PA group,including 2(2.0%)cases of arrhythmia and 1(1.0%)cases of nausea and vomiting.The statistical analysis of adverse events after thrombolysis between the two groups showed that the difference was statistically significant(P < 0.05).Conclusion:1.There was no significant difference in the number of cases with good prognosis 90 days after thrombolysis(m RS score ≤ 2)and NIHSS score ≥ 4 points 7 days between the two groups.2.There was no significant difference in D-D,FDP,TT,Pt,APTT and bleeding risk between the two groups after thrombolysis.There was no death case between the two groups after thrombolysis,and there was significant difference in adverse events after thrombolysis(except bleeding symptoms)(P <0.05).3.The efficacy of UK and rt-PA after thrombolysis did not show the opposite sex.In terms of safety,there was no difference in risk.The incidence of UK after thrombolysis was higher.There was no death after thrombolysis in the two groups. |
PDF Full Text Request