经桡动脉和股动脉途径行冠状动脉介入术的临床比较

桑更生; 石增刚; 石世强; 徐刚; 何强先; 陈以强; 张隽

经桡动脉和股动脉途径行冠状动脉介入术的临床比较

Comparison of radial and femoral approaches in percutaneous coronary intervention

摘要

摘要: 目的:探讨经桡动脉途径和经股动脉途径行冠状动脉介入诊治的效果和优缺点。方法:在履行知情告知并尊重患者意愿的情况下,分别对98例和59例冠心病患者经桡动脉途径(桡动脉组)和经股动脉途径(股动脉组)行冠状动脉造影和介入治疗,分别观察手术操作成功率和血管并发症的发生情况。结果:桡动脉组和股动脉组的冠状动脉造影术和冠状动脉介入治疗成功率分别为95.92%、98.31%和94.87%、96.15%,两组差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);外周血管并发症发生率分别为5.1%、27.1%和7.7%、46.2%,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论:经桡动脉途径与股动脉途径行冠状动脉介入诊治的手术成功率相似,但经桡动脉途径的外周血管并发症相对少。

Abstract: Objective: To analyze the advantages and disadvantages of percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI) via the radial artery or femoral artery.Methods: One hundred and fifty-seven cases undergoing coronary angiography(CAG) and/or PCI were divided into two groups:radial approach group(98 cases) and femoral approach group(59 cases).The rates of success and complication were observed and compared statistically.Results: The success rate of CAG in the radial artery group and femoral artery group was 95.92% and 98.31%,respectively;and the success rate of PCI in the radial approach group and the femoral approach group was 94.87% and 96.15%,respectively(P>0.05);the incidence of local complication in the radial approach group was significantly lower than that in the femoral approach group(5.1% vs 27.1% and 7.7% vs 46.2%) (P<0.01).Conclusions: PCI via the radial artery or the femoral artery has a similar success rate,but PCI via the radial artery has a lower incidence of local complication.

HTML全文

参考文献(0)

施引文献

资源附件(0)