Boulanger Henri, Ahriz-Saksi Salima, Flamant Martin, Vigeral Philippe
1Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Centre de Néphrologie et de Dialyse Clinique de l'Estree, Stains - France.
J Vasc Access. 2014 Mar-Apr;15(2):102-7. doi: 10.5301/jva.5000176. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
Our aim was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the IRIS® bandage (Nephrokit®) on post-puncture bleeding compared to conventional manual compression.
Sixty-four patients, hemodialyzed with an arteriovenous fistula, were enrolled in a 3-week prospective study. Conventional manual compression was used during the first week, the IRIS® bandage during the second week and conventional manual compression again during the third week. The outcomes analyzed were the persistence or absence of bleeding 3 minutes post-puncture with IRIS® device compared to conventional manual compression. The safety of the IRIS® bandage was also evaluated.
Rates of persistent bleeding 3 minutes post-puncture at arterial sites were 53±6% and 56±5%, respectively, during the first and third weeks (conventional compression) versus 18±5% during the second week (IRIS® bandage). Similarly, rates of persistent bleeding 3 minutes post-puncture at venous sites were 45±6% and 45±6%, respectively, with conventional compression versus 23±5% with the IRIS® bandage. The difference between the IRIS® device and conventional compression therefore proved highly statistically significant (p<0.05) for both arterial and venous puncture sites. No particular adverse events were observed with the IRIS® device.
Post-puncture bleeding time at arteriovenous fistula sites is significantly shortened by the IRIS® bandage in comparison with conventional manual compression.
我们的目的是评估IRIS®绷带（Nephrokit®）与传统手动压迫相比，在穿刺后出血方面的安全性和有效性。
64例使用动静脉内瘘进行血液透析的患者参加了一项为期3周的前瞻性研究。第一周使用传统手动压迫，第二周使用IRIS®绷带，第三周再次使用传统手动压迫。分析的结果是与传统手动压迫相比，使用IRIS®装置穿刺后3分钟出血的持续情况或有无出血。还评估了IRIS®绷带的安全性。
在第一周和第三周（传统压迫）期间，动脉穿刺点穿刺后3分钟持续出血率分别为53±6%和56±5%，而在第二周（IRIS®绷带）期间为18±5%。同样，静脉穿刺点穿刺后3分钟，传统压迫的持续出血率分别为45±6%和45±6%，而IRIS®绷带为23±5%。因此，对于动脉和静脉穿刺点，IRIS®装置与传统压迫之间的差异在统计学上具有高度显著性（p<0.05）。使用IRIS®装置未观察到特殊不良事件。
与传统手动压迫相比，IRIS®绷带显著缩短了动静脉内瘘穿刺点的穿刺后出血时间。
