Comparative analysis of amiodarone and properazone in patients with rapid arrhythmia
胺碘酮与普罗帕酮在快速性心律失常患者院前急救效果中的对比分析

摘要

目的 比较快速性心律失常患者院前急救中应用胺碘酮与普罗帕酮治疗的效果。方法 择取本院急诊科院前急救中收治的快速性心律失常患者进行研究，共计100例，收治时间为2020年1月至2021年12月。采用计算机抽号方式随机分组，分对胺碘组（n=50）、普罗帕组（n=50）。胺碘组采用胺碘酮治疗，普罗帕组采用普罗帕酮治疗。比较两组治疗效果、用药不良反应发生率以及治疗前后的HRV参数指标水平。结果 胺碘组患者治疗有效率98.00%，高于普罗帕组（P<0.05）。胺碘组用药不良反应4.00%，低于普罗帕组（P<0.05）。胺碘组治疗后sDNNindex、SDNN、rMSSD水平高于普罗帕组（P<0.05）。结论 快速性心律失常患者院前急救中采用胺碘酮治疗效果优于普罗帕酮治疗，且用药安全性更高，建议首选。

Abstract

Objective To compare the effect of amiodarone and proparadenone treatment in prehospital emergency treatment in patients with rapid arrhythmia.
Methods The patients admitted in the emergency department were 100 patients from January 2020 to December 2021. The group was randomly ized by computer into amine iodine group (n=50) and Proa group (n=50). The amine iodinated group was treated with amiodarone and the propa group was treated with propadone. The treatment effect, the incidence of adverse drug reactions, and the index level of HRV parameters before and after treatment were compared between the two groups.
Results The response rate of treatment was 98.00%, higher than that of Proa group (P <0.05). Adverse reactions in amine iodine group were 4.00%, which was lower than that in proa group (P <0.05). The levels of sDNNindex, SDNN and rMSSD were higher in the amine-iodine group than in the proa group (P <0.05).
Conclusion   Amiodarone is better than properazenone, and the drug safety is recommended.