Upponi S S, Ganeshan A G, Warakaulle D R, Phillips-Hughes J, Boardman P, Uberoi R
Department of Clinical Radiology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headley Way, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DZ, United Kingdom.
Eur J Radiol. 2007 Feb;61(2):332-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.09.007. Epub 2006 Oct 30.
The aim of this study was to compare the angioseal device to manual compression for femoral artery puncture following peripheral vascular procedures, in the context of day case vascular procedures. One hundred patients were prospectively randomised to haemostasis using the angioseal device or manual compression following arterial puncture for peripheral vascular diagnostic or intervention procedures. Data were collected regarding time to haemostasis and complications immediately post-procedure, at 1h, 2h and at 1 week. There were 50 patients in each group. There were no significant differences in demographic variables, or in complication rates immediately, at 1h, 2h and at 1 week (Chi-squared). The only significant difference between the two groups was time to haemostasis. The mean time to haemostasis in the compression group was 10.6 min and 2.0 min in the angioseal group (t-test p<0.0001). In conclusion, no significant differences in complications were found between manual compression and angioseal. However, there was a significant difference in time to haemostasis.
本研究的目的是在日间血管手术的背景下,比较血管封堵装置与手动压迫法用于外周血管手术后股动脉穿刺止血的效果。100例患者被前瞻性随机分为两组,分别在进行外周血管诊断或介入手术后,使用血管封堵装置或手动压迫法进行止血。收集了术后即刻、1小时、2小时及1周时的止血时间和并发症数据。每组各有50例患者。两组在人口统计学变量以及术后即刻、1小时、2小时和1周时的并发症发生率方面均无显著差异(卡方检验)。两组之间唯一的显著差异在于止血时间。压迫组的平均止血时间为10.6分钟,血管封堵组为2.0分钟(t检验,p<0.0001)。总之,手动压迫法和血管封堵法在并发症方面未发现显著差异。然而,在止血时间上存在显著差异。