地奥司明、利伐沙班分别联合腔内微波消融闭合术与聚多卡醇治疗下肢静脉曲张的效果比较

Comparison of effects of diosmin and rivaroxaban respectively combined with endovenous microwave ablation closure and polidocanol in treatment of lower extremity varicose veins

  • 摘要:
    目的 观察地奥司明、利伐沙班分别联合腔内微波消融闭合术(EMA)与聚多卡醇治疗下肢静脉曲张(VVLE)的效果及对凝血功能和视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分、静脉临床严重程度评分(VCSS)的影响。
    方法 选取111例VVLE患者作为研究对象,采用随机数字表法分为A组、B组、C组,每组37例。A组采用EMA和聚多卡醇治疗, B组采用地奥司明联合EMA和聚多卡醇治疗, C组采用利伐沙班联合EMA和聚多卡醇治疗。比较3组的VAS评分、VCSS、凝血功能指标凝血酶原时间(PT)、D-二聚体(D-D)、纤维蛋白原(FIB)、活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)和并发症发生情况。
    结果 治疗后, 3组VAS评分、VCSS均低于治疗前,且C组、B组低于A组, B组低于C组,差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。治疗后, 3组PT、APTT、FIB均长于或高于治疗前,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05); 治疗后, A组、B组D-D水平高于治疗前, C组D-D水平低于治疗前,且C组D-D水平低于A组和B组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。B组、C组术后各并发症发生率和并发症总发生率低于A组,且B组低于C组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。
    结论 地奥司明联合EMA与聚多卡醇方案在降低术后并发症发生率、改善VAS评分和VCSS结果方面更具优势,利伐沙班联合EMA与聚多卡醇方案在降低术后下肢静脉血栓风险方面表现更佳。2种联合方案治疗VVLE均安全有效,且不影响凝血功能,不增加出血风险。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To observe the effects of diosmin and rivaroxaban respectively combined with endovenous microwave ablation closure (EMA) and polidocanol in the treatment of lower extremity varicose veins (VVLE), as well as their impacts on coagulation function, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, and venous clinical severity score (VCSS).
    Methods A total of 111 patients with VVLE were selected as the research subjects and divided into Group A, Group B, and Group C using the random number table method, with 37 patients in each group. Group A was treated with EMA and polidocanol, Group B was treated with diosmin combined with EMA and polidocanol, and Group C was treated with rivaroxaban combined with EMA and polidocanol. The VAS scores, VCSS, coagulation function indicators prothrombin time (PT), D-dimer (D-D), fibrinogen (FIB), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), and the incidence of complications were compared among the three groups.
    Results After treatment, the VAS scores and VCSS in all three groups were lower than those before treatment. Moreover, the scores in Group C and Group B were lower than those in Group A, and the scores in Group B were lower than those in Group C, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). After treatment, the PT, APTT, and FIB in all three groups were longer or higher than those before treatment, but the differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05). After treatment, the D-D levels in Group A and Group B were higher than those before treatment, while the D-D level in Group C was lower than that before treatment. Additionally, the D-D level in Group C was lower than those in Group A and Group B, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). The incidence of various postoperative complications and the total complication rate in Group B and Group C were lower than those in Group A, and the rates in Group B were lower than those in Group C, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05).
    Conclusion The diosmin combined with EMA and polidocanol regimen has more advantages in reducing the incidence of postoperative complications and improving VAS scores and VCSS. The rivaroxaban combined with EMA and polidocanol regimen shows better performance in reducing the risk of postoperative lower extremity venous thrombosis. Both combined regimens are safe and effective in the treatment of VVLE, and do not affect coagulation function or increase the risk of bleeding.

     

/

返回文章
返回