ISSN 2097-5724 CN 61-1535/R 主管·主办：陕西省疾病预防控制中心
作者投稿| 编辑办公| 专家办公| 下载中心| 联系我们
疾 疾病预防与控制 Disease Prevention and Control 医学学术期刊 双月刊
热门：放射性肺炎高血压慢性病管理
2026-01-060 检验与方法 2026, (01)

治疗方法选择对不同衰弱分期的非ST段抬高心梗患者影响

陈慧敏李慧敏袁清茹吕风华

河南医药大学第一附属医院

14下载次数 0被引频次 45阅读次数 0参考文献
知网阅读全文
摘要

摘要：目的 研究经皮冠状动脉介入（PCI）治疗与保守治疗对老年不同衰弱分期非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死（NSTEMI）患者的影响。方法 收集 572 例老年不同衰弱分期 NSTEMI 患者临床资料，根据不同衰弱分期分为无衰弱组（316 例）、衰弱前期组（147 例）以及衰弱组（109 例），每个分期内各分为两组，为保守治疗组和介入治疗组；对比三组患者的心血管不良事件（MACE）、再住院率、生活质量等指标。结果 三组患者的 MACE 发生率（保守治疗组 vs. 介入治疗）：无衰弱组（25.66% vs. 8.54%，P＜0.05），衰弱前期组（35.11% vs. 15.09%，P＜0.05），衰弱组（44.83% vs. 27.27%，P＜0.05）。三组患者的再住院率（保守治疗组 vs. 介入治疗组）：无衰弱组（32.24% vs. 18.90%，P＜0.05），衰弱前期组（40.43% vs. 26.42%，P＜0.05），衰弱组（45.98% vs. 31.82%， P＜0.05）。三组患者的生活质量评分（保守治疗组 vs. 介入治疗组）：无衰弱组（60.96±4.73 vs. 81.56±6.43， P＜0.05），衰弱前期组（55.34±4.58 vs. 75.38±6.51，P＜0.05），衰弱组（50.08±4.47 vs. 69.49±6.37，P＜0.05）。结论 经皮冠状动脉介入治疗能够减少不同衰弱分期 NSTEMI 患者 MACE 的发生，降低患者再住院率，提高生活质量水平。衰弱的 NSTEMI 患者采取介入治疗仍可从中获益，但生活质量明显低于无衰弱及衰弱前期患者。

Abstract

Abstract: Objective Study on the effects of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and conservative treatment on elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in different frailty stages. Methods Collectd the clinical data of 572 elderly patients with NSTEMI at different stages of frailty. The patients were divided into three groups according to their frailty stages: non-frailty group (316 cases), pre-frailty group (147 cases), and frailty group (109 cases). Within each stage, the patients were further divided into two groups: conservative treatment group and interventional treatment group. The cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), rehospitalization rate, and quality of life of the patients among the three groups were compared. Results The incidence of MACE in the three groups of patients (conservative treatment group vs. intervention treatment group) : the non-frailty group (25.66% vs. 8.54%, P＜0.05), the pre-frailty group (35.11% vs. 15.09%, P＜0.05), and the frailty group (44.83% vs. 27.27%, P＜0.05). The readmission rate in the three groups of patients (conservative treatment group vs. intervention treatment group) : the non-frailty group (32.24% vs. 18.90%, P＜0.05), the pre-frailty group (40.43% vs. 26.42%, P＜0.05), and the frailty group (45.98% vs. 31.82%, P＜0.05). The quality of life scores in the three groups of patients (conservative treatment group vs. intervention treatment group) : the non-frailty group (60.96±4.73 vs. 81.56±6.43, P＜0.05), the pre-frailty group (55.34±4.58 vs.75.38±6.51, P＜0.05), and the frailty group (50.08±4.47 vs. 69.49±6.37, P＜0.05). Conclusion Percutaneous coronary intervention can reduce the occurrence of MACE in NSTEMI patients at different stages of frailty, lower the rehospitalization rate of patients, and improve the quality of life. Frail NSTEMI patients can still benefit from interventional treatment, but their quality of life is significantly lower than that of patients in the non-frailty group and those in the pre-frailty stage.

引用本文

按标准格式复制，或导出到文献管理软件
[1]陈慧敏,李慧敏,袁清茹,等.治疗方法选择对不同衰弱分期的非ST段抬高心梗患者影响[J],2026,01(01):.