Suppr超能文献

经桡动脉与股动脉导管插入术后中风的荟萃分析。

Meta-analysis of stroke after transradial versus transfemoral artery catheterization.

机构信息

VA North Texas Health Care System and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol. 2013 Oct 15;168(6):5234-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.08.026. Epub 2013 Aug 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Transradial (TR) catheterization is gaining popularity due to its association with lower bleeding and access site complications, improved patient comfort, and lower costs compared to transfemoral (TF) catheterization; however, there is concern that TR catheterization may be associated with an increased risk of neurological complications. New randomized data has emerged since the publication of the last meta-analysis evaluating the risk of stroke between TR and TF catheterization in 2009.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized studies published until 2013 reporting risk of stroke in TR vs. TF catheterization.

RESULTS

Data from 11,273 patients in 13 studies were collated. The majority of patients were men, and 8987 (79.7%) were enrolled in acute coronary syndrome trials. Very few patients had a history of prior coronary artery bypass grafting, and approximately 2/3 of patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Stroke occurred in 25 of 5659 patients in the TR group, vs. 24 of 5614 patients in the TF group. There was no difference in stroke rates between the TR and TF groups (risk difference 0.00%, 95% confidence interval -0.29%-0.25%, p=0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

TR catheterization is not associated with a significant increase in stroke compared to TF catheterization.

摘要

背景

与经股动脉(TF)入路相比,经桡动脉(TR)入路因出血和入路部位并发症较少、患者舒适度提高、成本降低而越来越受欢迎;然而,人们担心 TR 入路可能与神经并发症风险增加有关。自 2009 年发表最后一次评估 TR 和 TF 入路在卒中风险方面的荟萃分析以来,已经出现了新的随机数据。

方法

我们对截至 2013 年发表的评价 TR 与 TF 入路在卒中风险方面的随机研究进行了荟萃分析。

结果

共汇总了 13 项研究的 11273 例患者的数据。大多数患者为男性,8987 例(79.7%)患者入组急性冠脉综合征试验。既往冠状动脉旁路移植术病史的患者很少,约 2/3 的患者接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。TR 组 5659 例患者中有 25 例发生卒中,TF 组 5614 例患者中有 24 例发生卒中。TR 组和 TF 组的卒中发生率无差异(风险差 0.00%,95%置信区间-0.29%至-0.25%,p=0.88)。

结论

与 TF 入路相比,TR 入路与卒中风险增加无关。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验