摘要
目的观察泰舒达联合脑循环功能治疗仪经颅电刺激小脑顶核(fastigial nucleus stimulation,FNS)治疗急性脑梗死昏迷患者的临床疗效。方法 90例急性脑梗死昏迷患者单盲随机分为3组,对照组1、对照组2、治疗组,每组30例。对照组1接受脑梗死常规治疗,对照组2给予常规治疗联合小脑电刺激治疗,治疗组在常规治疗基础上,加用泰舒达联合小脑电刺激治疗。3组疗程均为21d。采用格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)和神经功能缺损量表(NIHSS)评定昏迷及神经功能缺损程度。结果 3组在治疗l4d、21d后GCS及NIHSS评分较基线水平均明显改善(P<0.05),治疗组的昏迷改善程度及神经功能缺损症状均显著优于常规治疗组(P<0.01);21d后,临床疗效评定显示,治疗组疗效明显优于常规治疗组(P<0.05),但与常规治疗联合小脑电刺激组比较,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论在常规治疗基础上,加用泰舒达联合脑循环功能仪治疗可显著改善脑梗死昏迷患者的意识状态及神经功能缺损症状,值得临床尝试。
Objective To observe the clinical effect of trastal combined with fastigial nucleus stimulation（FNS）by using cerebrovascular functional therapy（CVFT）in coma patients with acute cerebral infarction.Methods 90 patients with coma were randomly divided into 3 groups：the control group 1,the control group 2,and the treatment group,each group were 30 cases.21 days were designed as a theraptutic course in these 3 groups.The control group 1 was only treated with routine treatment.The control group 2 was received routine treatment plus FNS.The treatment group was treated with trastal plus FNS on the basis of routine treatment.The therapeutic efficacy was evaluated by GCS and NIHSS.Results After 14 days and 21 days,the average GCS and NIHSS in these 3 groups after treatment were significantly better than before（P0.05）,and the GCS and NIHSS in the treatment group were better than routine treatment（P0.05）.21 days later,the clinical effect suggested that the treatment group was better than the control group 1（P0.05）,but there was no statistical significance between the treatment group and control group 2.Conclusion On the basis of routine treatment,the acute cerebral infarction coma patients treated with trastal combined with CVFT were worth trying.
出处
《中风与神经疾病杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2012年第11期1023-1026,共4页
Journal of Apoplexy and Nervous Diseases
基金
国家重点基础研究发展计划(973计划
2009CB918300)
关键词
脑梗死
昏迷
泰舒达
脑循环功能治疗仪
ICerebral infarction
Coma
Trastal
Cerebrovascular functional therapy
