• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

中国老年患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中桡动脉与股动脉途径的回顾性分析

Transradial Versus Transfemoral Approach for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Elderly Patients in China: A Retrospective Analysis.

作者信息

Jin Chen, Xu Yi, Qiao Shu-Bin, Tang Xin-Ran, Wu Yong-Jian, Yan Hong-Bing, Dou Ke-Fei, Xu Bo, Yang Jin-Gang, Yang Yue-Jin

机构信息

State Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center of Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100037, China.

出版信息

Chin Med Sci J. 2017 Sep 27;32(3):161-170. doi: 10.24920/J1001-9294.2017.023.

DOI:10.24920/J1001-9294.2017.023
PMID:28956743
Abstract

Objective To compare hospital costs and clinical outcomes between transradial intervention (TRI) and transfemoral intervention (TFI) in elderly patients aged over 65 years. Methods We identified 1229 patients aged over 65 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Fuwai Hospital, Beijing, China, between January 1 and December 31, 2010. Total hospital costs and in-hospital outcomes were compared between TRI and TFI. An inverse probability weighting (IPW) model was introduced to control potential biases. Results Patients who underwent TRI were younger, less often female, more likely to receive PCI for single-vessel lesions, and less likely to undergo the procedure for ostial lesions. TRI was associated with a cost saving of CNY7495 (95%CI: CNY4419-10 420). Such differences were mainly driven by lower PCI-related costs. TRI patients had shorter length of stay (1.9 days, 95%CI: 1.1-2.7 days), shorter post-procedural stay (0.7 days, 95%CI: 0.3-1.1 days), and fewer major adverse cardiac events (adjusted odds ratio = 0.47, 95%CI: 0.31-0.73). There was no statistical significance in the incidence of post-PCI bleeding between TRI and TFI (P>0.05). Such differences remained consistent in clinically relevant subgroups of acute myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, and stable angina. Conclusion The use of TRI in patients aged over 65 years was associated with significantly reduced hospital costs and more favorable clinical outcomes.

摘要

目的 比较经桡动脉介入治疗(TRI)与经股动脉介入治疗(TFI)在65岁以上老年患者中的住院费用及临床结局。方法 我们纳入了2010年1月1日至12月31日期间在中国北京阜外医院接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的1229例65岁以上患者。比较TRI组和TFI组的总住院费用及住院期间结局。引入逆概率加权(IPW)模型以控制潜在偏倚。结果 接受TRI的患者更年轻,女性比例更低,单支血管病变接受PCI的可能性更大,开口病变接受该手术的可能性更小。TRI可节省费用7495元人民币(95%置信区间:4419 - 10420元人民币)。这种差异主要由较低的PCI相关费用驱动。TRI组患者住院时间更短(1.9天,95%置信区间:1.1 - 2.7天),术后住院时间更短(0.7天,95%置信区间:0.3 - 1.1天),主要不良心脏事件更少(校正比值比 = 0.47,95%置信区间:0.31 - 0.73)。TRI组和TFI组PCI术后出血发生率无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在急性心肌梗死、急性冠状动脉综合征和稳定型心绞痛等临床相关亚组中,这些差异仍然一致。结论 65岁以上患者使用TRI与显著降低的住院费用及更有利的临床结局相关。

相似文献

1
Transradial Versus Transfemoral Approach for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Elderly Patients in China: A Retrospective Analysis.中国老年患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中桡动脉与股动脉途径的回顾性分析
Chin Med Sci J. 2017 Sep 27;32(3):161-170. doi: 10.24920/J1001-9294.2017.023.
2
Costs of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention.经桡动脉入路经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的成本。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Aug;6(8):827-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.04.014. Epub 2013 Jul 17.
3
Costs and Benefits Associated With Transradial Versus Transfemoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China.中国经桡动脉与经股动脉经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的成本与效益
J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Apr 22;5(4):e002684. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002684.
4
Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches in Women Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: A Retrospective Observational Study.中国接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的女性患者经桡动脉与经股动脉途径的比较:一项回顾性观察研究
Angiology. 2017 Oct;68(9):799-806. doi: 10.1177/0003319716685670. Epub 2017 Jan 5.
5
Comparison of costs between transradial and transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention: a cohort analysis from the Premier research database.经桡动脉与经股动脉经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的成本比较:来自 Premier 研究数据库的队列分析。
Am Heart J. 2013 Mar;165(3):303-9.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.10.004. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
6
Transradial versus transfemoral coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: is transradial coronary intervention suitable for emergency PCI in high-risk acute myocardial infarction?经桡动脉与经股动脉冠状动脉介入治疗急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克:经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗是否适用于高危急性心肌梗死的急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗?
J Invasive Cardiol. 2014 May;26(5):196-202.
7
Costs Associated With Access Site and Same-Day Discharge Among Medicare Beneficiaries Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Evaluation of the Current Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Care Pathways in the United States.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的 Medicare 受益患者中与入路部位相关的成本和当日出院:对美国当前经皮冠状动脉介入治疗护理路径的评估。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Feb 27;10(4):342-351. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.11.049.
8
Safety and feasibility of transradial approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction.老年急性心肌梗死患者经桡动脉途径行直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的安全性与可行性
Chin Med J (Engl). 2008 May 5;121(9):782-6.
9
Feasibility limits of transradial primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction in the real life (TRAP-AMI).经桡动脉直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗急性心肌梗死的真实世界可行性限制(TRAP-AMI)。
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 30;168(2):1056-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.10.024. Epub 2012 Nov 16.
10
A Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chinese Women Based on a Propensity Score Analysis.基于倾向得分分析的中国女性经桡动脉与经股动脉冠状动脉介入治疗的比较
Korean Circ J. 2018 Aug;48(8):719-727. doi: 10.4070/kcj.2018.0040.

引用本文的文献

1
A Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chinese Women Based on a Propensity Score Analysis.基于倾向得分分析的中国女性经桡动脉与经股动脉冠状动脉介入治疗的比较
Korean Circ J. 2018 Aug;48(8):719-727. doi: 10.4070/kcj.2018.0040.