Suppr超能文献

经桡动脉穿刺后使用高岭土基止血垫(QuikClot Radial)与机械压迫(TR Band)的止血时间比较:一项前瞻性试点研究。

Comparison of Hemostasis Times With a Kaolin-Based Hemostatic Pad (QuikClot Radial) vs Mechanical Compression (TR Band) Following Transradial Access: A Pilot Prospective Study.

作者信息

Roberts Jonathan S, Niu Jianli, Pastor-Cervantes Juan A

机构信息

Memorial Regional Hospital, 1150 N. 35th Avenue, Suite 605, Hollywood, FL 33021 USA.

出版信息

J Invasive Cardiol. 2017 Oct;29(10):328-334. Epub 2017 Aug 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Hemostasis following transradial access (TRA) is usually achieved by mechanical compression. We investigated use of the QuikClot Radial hemostasis pad (Z-Medica) compared with the TR Band (Terumo Medical) to shorten hemostasis after TRA.

METHODS

Thirty patients undergoing TRA coronary angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized into three cohorts post TRA: 10 patients received mechanical compression with the TR Band, 10 patients received 30 min of compression with the QuikClot Radial pad, and 10 patients received 60 min of compression with the QuikClot Radial pad. Times to hemostasis and access-site complications were recorded. Radial artery patency was evaluated 1 hour after hemostasis by the reverse Barbeau's test.

RESULTS

There were no differences in patient characteristics, mean dose of heparin (7117 ± 1054 IU), or mean activated clotting time value (210 ± 50 sec) at the end of procedure among the three groups. Successful hemostasis was achieved in 100% of patients with both the 30-min and 60-min compression groups using the QuikClot pad. Hemostasis failure occurred in 50% of patients when the TR Band was initially weaned at the protocol-driven time (40 min after sheath removal). Mean compression time for hemostasis with the TR Band was 149.4 min compared with 30.7 min and 60.9 min for the 30-min and 60-min QuikClot groups, respectively. No radial artery occlusion occurred in any subject at the end of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the QuikClot Radial pad following TRA in this pilot trial significantly shortened hemostasis times when compared with the TR Band, with no increased complications noted.

摘要

背景

经桡动脉通路(TRA)后的止血通常通过机械压迫来实现。我们研究了与TR Band(泰尔茂医疗)相比,使用QuikClot桡动脉止血垫(Z-Medica)来缩短TRA后的止血时间。

方法

30例行TRA冠状动脉造影和/或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者在TRA后被随机分为三组:10例患者使用TR Band进行机械压迫,10例患者使用QuikClot桡动脉垫压迫30分钟,10例患者使用QuikClot桡动脉垫压迫60分钟。记录止血时间和穿刺部位并发症。止血后1小时通过反向巴博试验评估桡动脉通畅情况。

结果

三组患者的患者特征、肝素平均剂量(7117±1054 IU)或手术结束时活化凝血时间平均值(210±50秒)无差异。使用QuikClot垫的30分钟和60分钟压迫组的所有患者均成功止血。当TR Band在方案规定的时间(拔鞘后40分钟)首次解除压迫时,50%的患者止血失败。TR Band止血的平均压迫时间为149.4分钟,而30分钟和60分钟QuikClot组分别为30.7分钟和60.9分钟。研究结束时,任何受试者均未发生桡动脉闭塞。

结论

在这项初步试验中,TRA后使用QuikClot桡动脉垫与TR Band相比,显著缩短了止血时间,且未发现并发症增加。

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