Hernández-Pérez Francisco J, Blasco-Lobo Ana, Goicolea Leire, Muñiz-Lozano Ana, Fernandez-Díaz José A, Domínguez José R, Goicolea-Ruigómez Javier
Unidad de Hemodinámica y Cardiología Intervencionista, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
Unidad de Hemodinámica y Cardiología Intervencionista, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2014 Jan;67(1):45-51. doi: 10.1016/j.rec.2013.06.015. Epub 2013 Oct 26.
The transradial approach is associated with a reduction in vascular access-related complications after primary percutaneous coronary interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of the routine use of transradial access in primary angioplasty and to evaluate how it affects subgroups with less favorable characteristics.
We analyzed 1029 consecutive patients with an ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome treated with primary angioplasty.
Transradial access was the primary approach in 93.1% of the patients. The success rate of primary angioplasty was 95.9%, and 87.6% of the patients were event-free 30 days after the procedure. Crossover was required in 3.0% of the patients with primary transradial access, and this rate remained stable over the years. Predictors of the need for crossover were age older than 75 years (odds ratio=2.50, 95% confidence interval, 1.09-5.71; P=.03) and a history of ischemic heart disease (odds ratio=2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-6.24; P=.02). Primary transfemoral access use was higher in women older than 75 years. Use of the transradial approach in this subgroup did not affect reperfusion time or the success of angioplasty, although there was a greater need for crossover (10.9% vs 2.6%; P=.006). Among patients in cardiogenic shock, the transradial approach was used in 51.5%; reperfusion times and angioplasty success rates were similar to those obtained with transfemoral access, but there was a greater need for crossover.
Transradial access can be used safely and effectively in most primary angioplasty procedures. In older women and in patients in cardiogenic shock, there is a higher crossover requirement, with no detriment to reperfusion time.
经桡动脉途径与直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后血管通路相关并发症的减少有关。本研究的目的是探讨在直接血管成形术中常规使用经桡动脉通路的可行性,并评估其对特征不太有利的亚组的影响。
我们分析了1029例接受直接血管成形术治疗的ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征连续患者。
93.1%的患者以经桡动脉通路作为主要途径。直接血管成形术的成功率为95.9%,87.6%的患者在术后30天无事件发生。3.0%的初次经桡动脉通路患者需要改为其他通路,且该比例多年来保持稳定。改为其他通路的预测因素为年龄大于75岁(比值比=2.50,95%置信区间,1.09 - 5.71;P = 0.03)和缺血性心脏病史(比值比=2.65;95%置信区间,1.12 - 6.24;P = 0.02)。75岁以上女性使用经股动脉通路作为主要途径的比例更高。在该亚组中使用经桡动脉途径不影响再灌注时间或血管成形术的成功率,尽管改为其他通路的需求更大(10.9%对2.6%;P = 0.006)。在心源性休克患者中,51.5%使用了经桡动脉途径;再灌注时间和血管成形术成功率与经股动脉通路相似,但改为其他通路的需求更大。
经桡动脉通路可安全有效地用于大多数直接血管成形术。在老年女性和心源性休克患者中,改为其他通路的需求更高,但对再灌注时间无不利影响。