Anjum Ibrar, Khan Muhammad Adnan, Aadil Muhammad, Faraz Aniqa, Farooqui Mudassir, Hashmi Amerah
Internal medicine, University of health science Lahore.
Neurosciences & Psychology, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology.
Cureus. 2017 Jun 3;9(6):e1309. doi: 10.7759/cureus.1309.
The main objective of this review paper is to study the comparison between transradial and transfemoral approach in catheterization. Transradial and transfemoral are two main approaches which are used as a diagnostic and therapeutic purpose in catheterization. The transradial approach in interventional cardiology is safe, effective, and feasible as compared to the transfemoral approach. The aim of this study is to compare pros and cons of transradial vs. transfemoral approach in catheterization. We conducted this systematic review on the role of transradial vs. transfemoral catheterization. The articles included real human data on interventional approaches. Reviews on these strategies were conducted in PubMed, medical literature analysis and retrieval system online (MEDLINE), Cochrane, Medscape and National Institute of Health. To maintain a high standard of review, studies published in all non-famous journals were excluded. Data collected from the studies have suggested that transradial approach has less bleeding complications, cost effective, decreased hospital mortality rate, and less access site complications as compared to transfemoral approach. However, longer procedural duration and radiation exposure are still concerns regarding transradial approach. The findings of the present study show that transradial approach in catheterization is safe, effective, and feasible as compared to the transfemoral approach. However, duration and radiation exposure are higher in the transradial access. Several studies suggest that the modern approach overweight in benefits with the comparison to the classical approach.
这篇综述文章的主要目的是研究经桡动脉和经股动脉途径在导管插入术中的比较。经桡动脉和经股动脉是在导管插入术中用于诊断和治疗目的的两种主要途径。与经股动脉途径相比，介入心脏病学中的经桡动脉途径是安全、有效且可行的。本研究的目的是比较经桡动脉与经股动脉途径在导管插入术中的优缺点。我们对经桡动脉与经股动脉导管插入术的作用进行了这项系统评价。纳入的文章包含关于介入途径的真实人体数据。在PubMed、在线医学文献分析和检索系统（MEDLINE）、Cochrane、Medscape和美国国立卫生研究院对这些策略进行了综述。为保持较高的综述标准，排除了所有非著名期刊上发表的研究。从研究中收集的数据表明，与经股动脉途径相比，经桡动脉途径出血并发症更少、具有成本效益、医院死亡率降低且穿刺部位并发症更少。然而，操作时间较长和辐射暴露仍是经桡动脉途径存在的问题。本研究的结果表明，与经股动脉途径相比，经桡动脉途径在导管插入术中是安全、有效且可行的。然而，经桡动脉穿刺的操作时间和辐射暴露更高。几项研究表明，与传统方法相比，现代方法的优势更为突出。
