Observation of the effect of neurointervention combined with intravenous thrombolysis in the treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke
神经介入联合静脉溶栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中患者的效果观察

摘要

目的 分析神经介入联合静脉溶栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中的临床效果。方法 回顾性分析2021年4月-2022年2月期间我院与合作医院联合治疗的急性缺血性脑卒中患者，共计76例，按就诊顺序平均分为对照组和观察组（每组各38例）。对两组急性缺血性脑卒中患者分别采用不同的治疗方式：对照组患者采用静脉溶栓治疗，观察组患者联合实施神经介入治疗；分析对比两组患者的治疗总效果及不良反应发生率；对比脑血流动力学指标：最小血流速度（V min）、最小血流量（Q min）、动态阻抗（DR）、脑血管外周阻力（R）、临界压力（CP），以及NIHSS评分，BI评分，FMA评分的指标变化情况。结果 统计分析后，观察组治疗总有效率显著高于对照组；脑血流动力学指标：颈动脉最小血流速度（V min）、最小血流量（Q min）、动态阻抗（DR）观察组各数据均高于对照组；观察组脑血管外周阻力（R）、临界压力（CP）指标明显比对照组低；同组患者治疗后的Ｂarthel指数（BI）评分、FMA评分均高于治疗前评分，NIHSS评分较治疗前大幅度降低，组间数据显示，Ｂarthel指数（BI）评分、FMA评分观察组显著高于对照组，NIHSS评分观察组更低，P＜0.05，说明存在对比意义。结论 急性缺血性脑卒中通过神经介入联合静脉溶栓治疗的临床效果更明显，有效促进患者肢体功能，大幅度提高其生活质量，值得推广，建议提倡。

Abstract

Objective To analyze the clinical effect of neurointervention combined with intravenous thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke.
Methods A total of 76 patients with acute ischemic stroke who were treated by our hospital and cooperative hospitals from April 2021 to February 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. example). Two groups of patients with acute ischemic stroke were treated with different treatment methods: patients in the control group were treated with intravenous thrombolysis, and patients in the observation group were treated with neurointerventional therapy; the overall treatment effect and the incidence of adverse reactions were analyzed and compared between the two groups; Comparison of cerebral hemodynamic indicators: minimum blood flow velocity (V min), minimum blood flow (Q min), dynamic impedance (DR), peripheral cerebrovascular resistance (R), critical pressure (CP), and NIHSS score, BI Score, the index change of FMA score.
Results After statistical analysis, the total effective rate of treatment in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group; cerebral hemodynamic indexes: minimum carotid artery blood flow velocity (V min), minimum blood flow (Q min), dynamic impedance (DR) in the observation group All data were higher than those in the control group; the peripheral cerebral vascular resistance (R) and critical pressure (CP) indexes in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group; the Barthel index (BI) scores and FMA scores in the same group after treatment were higher than those before treatment The NIHSS score was significantly lower than that before treatment. The data between the groups showed that the Barthel index (BI) score and FMA score in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group, and the NIHSS score in the observation group was lower, P<0.05, indicating that there was a comparative significance.
Conclusion   The clinical effect of neurointervention combined with intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke is more obvious, which can effectively promote the patient's limb function and greatly improve their quality of life. It is worthy of promotion and recommended.