Gobeil François, Brück Martin, Louvard Yves, Levèvre Thierry, Morice Marie-Claude, Ludwig Josef
Notre-Dame Hospital, Cardiology Department, Montreal University School of Medicine, 1560 Sherbrooke East Street, H2L 4M1, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
J Invasive Cardiol. 2004 Jul;16(7):353-5.
We compared 5 versus 6 French (Fr) guiding catheters in coronary intervention using the transradial approach. Smaller guiding catheters may have advantages over larger ones in transradial coronary intervention. However, there is uncertainty about how small is small enough, and when smaller would become too small. Eligible patients were randomized between the 5 and 6 Fr groups before the procedure. The primary endpoint was procedural success. A total of 216 patients were randomized. Procedural success was obtained in 95% of the 6 Fr group versus 90% of the 5 Fr group (p = 0.25). Most of the failures in the 5 Fr group were because of cross-over to the 6 Fr group. Crossover to the 5 Fr group occurred in 1 patient in the 6 Fr group (0.9%; p = 0.05) because of a small radial artery. Transradial intervention using 5 Fr guiding catheters necessitates crossover to a 6 Fr catheter in 6.8% of cases, and offers no clear advantages over the 6 Fr technique.
我们比较了在经桡动脉途径的冠状动脉介入治疗中，5F与6F引导导管的应用情况。在经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗中，较小的引导导管可能比大的导管更具优势。然而，多小才算足够小，以及多小就会变得太小，目前尚无定论。符合条件的患者在手术前被随机分为5F组和6F组。主要终点是手术成功。共有216例患者被随机分组。6F组的手术成功率为95%，而5F组为90%（p = 0.25）。5F组的大多数失败是因为改用了6F导管。6F组有1例患者（0.9%；p = 0.05）因桡动脉细小而改用了5F导管。使用5F引导导管进行经桡动脉介入治疗时，有6.8%的病例需要改用6F导管，且与6F技术相比没有明显优势。
