Impact of nimodipine on the neurologic impairment score, cerebral hemodynamic parameters and clinical efficacy of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage in acute phase

Abstract

Objective To compare the impact of nimodipine combined with mannitol and mannitol only on the neurologic impairment score, cerebral hemodynamic parameters and clinical efficacy of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage in acute phase. Methods 68 patients with hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage in acute phase were selected, and they were randomly divided into control group(34 cases) and study group(34 cases) by digital table method.The control group was treated with mannitol only, while the study group was treated with nimodipine combined with mannitol.The clinical efficacy, hematoma volume, area of cerebral edema, cerebral hemodynamic parameters, neurologic impairment score, Barthel score of the two groups were compared, and the adverse drug reaction of the study group was observed. Results The total effective rate(82.4% vs.94.1%) and efficiency rate(44.1% vs.61.8%) of the two groups had statistically significant differences(χ2=5.688, 4.956, all P<0.05). The neurologic impairment score[post-treatment of the control group (10.2±9.3) points vs.pre-treatment (14.9±11.6) points, t=4.607, P<0.05; post-treatment of the study group (6.0±4.7) points vs.pre-treatment (14.4±10.8) points, t=8.379, P<0.05], area of cerebral edema[post-treatment of the control group (3.7±0.6)cm2 vs.pre-treatment (4.8±0.9)cm2, t=5.262, P<0.05; post-treatment of the study group (2.2±0.8)points vs.pre-treatment (5.1±1.2)points, t=9.193, P<0.05], hematoma volume[post-treatment of the control group (12.5±7.4)mL vs.pre-treatment (18.9±7.1)mL, t=6.033, P<0.05; post-treatment of the study group (8.6±8.2)points vs.pre-treatment (18.4±7.3)points, t=10.437, P<0.05]and Barthel score[post-treatment of the control group (73.6±40.4)points vs.pre-treatment (32.8±27.1)mL, t=7.827, P<0.05; post-treatment of the study group (85.6±46.8)points vs.pre-treatment (36.7±28.6)points, t=10.966, P<0.05]of the two groups had statistically significant differences.The neurologic impairment score of the study group after treatment was much lower than that of the control group[(6.0±4.7)points vs.(10.2±9.3)points, t=3.955, P<0.05]. There were statistically significant differences between after and before treatment of the control group in critical pressure[(9.3±2.2)kPa vs.(9.6±2.1)kPa, t=5.046, P<0.05], peripheral resistance[(1 788.2±209.4)kPa·s-1·mL-1 vs. (1 659.2±219.3)kPa·s-1·mL-1, t=6.146, P<0.05]and mean blood flow velocity[(6.4±1.1) mL/s vs. (7.9±1.2)mL/s, t=6.266, P<0.05]. The cerebral hemodynamic parameters of the study group after treatment had statistical differences compared with before treatment in critical pressure[(8.9±2.3)kPa vs.(8.2±1.1)kPa, t=5.292, P<0.05], peripheral resistance[(1 794.3±188.6)kPa·s-1·mL-1 vs. (1 469.5±161.8)kPa·s-1·mL-1, t=4.693, P<0.05], mean blood flow velocity[(6.4±1.3)mL/s vs. (8.6±1.5)mL/s, t=4.069, P<0.05], mean blood flow volume[(13.3±3.0) cm/s vs.(14.5±3.3)cm/s, t=5.633, P<0.05]. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in critical pressure, peripheral resistance, mean blood flow velocity, mean blood flow volume(t=4.664, 4.563, 5.532, 5.327, all P<0.05). There were 4 cases of facial flushing, 2 cases of pulsatile headache, 3 cases of blood pressure drop, and the symptoms were gradually relieved after slowing down. Conclusion In the acute phase of hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage, nimodipine can reduce the scope of hematoma in a timely manner, significantly improve the efficacy and the quality of life of patients, it is worthy of clinical promotion. Key words: Hypertension; Cerebral hemorrhage; Nimodipine; Neurologic impairment score