Suppr超能文献

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗当日机构间转运的桡动脉与股动脉入路比较

Radial versus femoral approach for same-day inter-facility transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention.

作者信息

Israeli Zeev, Lavi Shahar, Bertand Olivier F, Mamas Mamas A, Bagur Rodrigo

机构信息

Interventional Cardiology Laboratories, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada.

Quebec Heart & Lung Institute, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

J Interv Cardiol. 2018 Apr;31(2):230-235. doi: 10.1111/joic.12486. Epub 2018 Jan 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The use of radial approach for coronary angiography, followed by same-day inter-facility transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not yet been evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the safety and feasibility of using the transradial as compared to the transfemoral approach in patients undergoing diagnostic angiogram with same-day transfer to a PCI facility.

METHODS

Patients that underwent diagnostic coronary angiography between January 2011 and June 2017 in a referring facility, and were transferred for same-day PCI were included. Patients' demographics, as well as procedural data and in-hospital outcome, were collected.

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-two participants were included. Of these, 36 (10.2%) patients received transradial access. Patients in the transradial group were older (68 ± 10 vs 62 ± 12 years, P = 0.007), and received a significantly higher total dose of heparin including both, diagnostic and PCI procedures (5935 ± 1865 vs 10029 ± 2771 units, P < 0.001). None of the transradial patients experienced bleeding or access-related complications. In the transfemoral group, 9 (3%) vascular-access complications were recorded. Contrast volume was lower for transradial patients (177 ± 47 vs 216 ± 75 mL, P < 0.001). A higher proportion of outpatients were discharged from the PCI-center the same day after transradial procedures (53% vs 1.3%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Transradial access for inter-facility transfer for PCI after diagnostic angiogram appears safe and feasible, without increasing the risk for ischemic hand complications. Transradial access was associated with fewer bleeding and vascular access-site complications, and with a higher likelihood for a same-day discharge home in outpatients.

摘要

背景

冠状动脉造影采用桡动脉入路,随后当日进行机构间转运以行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI),这一方法尚未得到评估。

目的

我们试图评估在当日转至PCI机构进行诊断性血管造影的患者中,与经股动脉入路相比,采用经桡动脉入路的安全性和可行性。

方法

纳入2011年1月至2017年6月在转诊机构接受诊断性冠状动脉造影并当日转至他处行PCI的患者。收集患者的人口统计学资料、手术数据及住院结局。

结果

共纳入352名参与者。其中,36名(10.2%)患者采用经桡动脉入路。经桡动脉组患者年龄较大(68±10岁 vs 62±12岁,P = 0.007),在诊断和PCI手术中接受的肝素总剂量显著更高(5935±1865单位 vs 10029±2771单位,P < 0.001)。经桡动脉入路的患者均未发生出血或与入路相关的并发症。在经股动脉组,记录到9例(3%)血管入路并发症。经桡动脉入路患者的造影剂用量较低(177±47 mL vs 216±75 mL,P < 0.001)。经桡动脉手术后当日从PCI中心出院的门诊患者比例更高(53% vs 1.3%,P < 0.001)。

结论

诊断性血管造影后经桡动脉入路进行机构间转运以行PCI似乎安全可行,且不会增加缺血性手部并发症的风险。经桡动脉入路与更少的出血和血管入路部位并发症相关,且门诊患者当日出院回家的可能性更高。

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