YIJUN ZONG1, HUI LIU2. YAN ZHANG2，XIN XU3， WEI LIU
1Department of clinical teaching and research，Nursing College of Hebei College of traditional Chinese Medicine, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China - 2Department of basic nursing teaching and research, Nursing College of Hebei College of traditional Chinese Medicine，Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China - 3Department of emergency, Hebei People's Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China
Objective: To analyze the clinical efficacy of mechanical ventilation on acute myocardial infarction complicated with acute pul- monary edema.
Methods: We selected a total of 80 acute myocardial infarction patients complicated with acute pulmonary edema who were admitted to this hospital for treatment between March 2013 and March 2016. Patients were divided into the control group and observa- tion according to their treatment methods with 40 in each group. Patients in the control group received the regular treatment plus the oxygen inhalation through nasal catheter, while those in the observation group underwent regular treatment plus the mechanical ventila- tion. Comparisons were carried out on the blood pressures, respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and indicators of blood-gas analysis before and after treatment, clinical efficacy and complications.
Results: Before treatment, comparisons of the systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), RR and HR showed that difference had no statistical significance (p>0.05); after treatment, RRs and HRs of patients in the observation group were signifi- cantly lower than those in the control group (p<0.05), but no statistical significance was identified in differences of SBP and DBP between two groups (p>0.05). Before treatment, we found no statistical significance in differences of levels of PaO2, PaCO2, HCO3- and SaO2 between two groups (p>0.05), but after treatment, levels of PaO2 and SaO2 in the observation group remained higher than those in the control group, while the levels of PaCP2 was still lower than those in the control group (p<0.05); after treatment, comparison of the level of HCO3- between two groups revealed no statistically significant difference (p>0.05). Clinical efficacy of patients in the observa- tion group was superior to that of the control group (p<0.05), and the incidence rate of complications in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Mechanical ventilation shows promising efficacy and safety in treatment of acute myocardial infarction patients with acute pulmonary edema.
Myocardial infarction, pulmonary edema, mechanical ventilation, outcome of treatment