University of Illinois at Chicago, Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, 840 S Wood St, Suite 935, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018 Aug 20;20(10):91. doi: 10.1007/s11886-018-1039-y.
This review aims to summarize and discuss the safety and efficacy of ulnar arterial approach for cardiac catheterization.
Ulnar access has been found to be as safe and efficacious as radial access. However, the number of access attempts and cross-over rates is higher than with radial access. Ulnar access is an excellent alternative after failed radial access as femoral access is associated with more bleeding and worse clinical outcomes. Future research should focus on ultrasound-guided ulnar access to reduce the number of puncture attempts.
本文旨在总结并讨论尺动脉入路行心导管术的安全性和有效性。
与桡动脉入路相比，尺动脉入路同样安全有效。但与桡动脉入路相比，尺动脉入路的尝试次数和交叉率更高。一旦桡动脉入路失败，尺动脉入路是一个很好的替代方法，因为股动脉入路与更多的出血和更差的临床结局相关。未来的研究应集中在超声引导的尺动脉入路上，以减少穿刺尝试次数。
