• 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

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者桡动脉与股动脉入路的比较:试验序贯分析。

Radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Trial sequential analysis.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV, USA.

Division of Cardiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV, USA.

出版信息

Am Heart J. 2020 Jun;224:98-104. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.03.014. Epub 2020 Mar 19.

DOI:10.1016/j.ahj.2020.03.014
PMID:32361279
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded conflicting results about the impact of transradial access (TRA) versus transfemoral access (TFA) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

METHODS

We performed a trial sequential analysis (TSA) of RCTs comparing TRA and TFA in patients with STEMI. The outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and access site complications.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies with 11,992 patients were included in the current TSA. The TRA group had lower 30-day mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90, P = .003), major bleeding (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.79, P = .0001), MACE (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.93, P = .01), and access site complications (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.28-0.48, P < .00001). There was no difference in MI and stroke between the 2groups. Applying TSA boundaries, the z-curve for 30-day mortality, major bleeding, MACE and access site complications crossed the conventional and the TSA boundaries, indicating firm evidence for better outcomes in the TRA group. For MI and stroke, the z-curve failed to cross the conventional and the TSA boundaries for both outcomes, indicating lack of signals of benefit or harm.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current TSA, the available data from RCTs support improved 30-day mortality, major bleeding, MACE and access site complication rates in STEMI patients treated by PCI through the radial access.

摘要

背景

随机对照试验(RCT)在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中,桡动脉入路(TRA)与股动脉入路(TFA)对 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者的影响结果相互矛盾。

方法

我们对比较 TRA 和 TFA 在 STEMI 患者中的 RCT 进行了试验序贯分析(TSA)。感兴趣的结局包括 30 天死亡率、大出血、主要不良心血管事件(MACE)、心肌梗死(MI)、卒中和入路部位并发症。

结果

共有 17 项研究,涉及 11992 例患者纳入本次 TSA。TRA 组 30 天死亡率较低(风险比 [RR] 0.72,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.58-0.90,P=0.003)、大出血(RR 0.62,95% CI 0.49-0.79,P=0.0001)、MACE(RR 0.74,95% CI 0.58-0.93,P=0.01)和入路部位并发症(RR 0.37,95% CI 0.28-0.48,P<0.00001)。两组之间 MI 和卒中有无差异。应用 TSA 边界,30 天死亡率、大出血、MACE 和入路部位并发症的 z 曲线均穿过常规和 TSA 边界,表明 TRA 组的结局有更好的证据。对于 MI 和卒中,z 曲线未能穿过常规和 TSA 边界,表明这两种结局均无获益或危害的信号。

结论

在当前的 TSA 中,来自 RCT 的可用数据支持在 PCI 中通过桡动脉入路治疗 STEMI 患者,可改善 30 天死亡率、大出血、MACE 和入路部位并发症发生率。

相似文献

1
Radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Trial sequential analysis.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者桡动脉与股动脉入路的比较:试验序贯分析。
Am Heart J. 2020 Jun;224:98-104. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.03.014. Epub 2020 Mar 19.
2
Impact of Access Site Practice on Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Following Thrombolysis for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the United Kingdom: An Insight From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Dataset.英国经溶栓治疗的 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中穿刺部位操作对临床结局的影响:来自英国心血管介入学会数据集的见解。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Nov 27;10(22):2258-2265. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.07.049.
3
Impact of Access Site on Bleeding and Ischemic Events in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Prasugrel: The ACCOAST Access Substudy.经普拉格雷治疗的非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的入路部位对出血和缺血事件的影响:ACCOAST 入路亚研究。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 May 9;9(9):897-907. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.041.
4
Influence of arterial access site selection on outcomes in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: are the results of randomized trials achievable in clinical practice?经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中动脉入路选择对结果的影响:随机临床试验的结果能否在临床实践中实现?
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Jul;6(7):698-706. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.03.011. Epub 2013 Jun 14.
5
Impact of Sex on Comparative Outcomes of Radial Versus Femoral Access in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Invasive Management: Data From the Randomized MATRIX-Access Trial.在接受介入治疗的急性冠状动脉综合征患者中,性别对桡动脉入路与股动脉入路的比较结果的影响:来自随机 MATRIX-Access 试验的数据。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jan 8;11(1):36-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.09.014.
6
Association of radial versus femoral access with contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction.在接受ST段抬高型心肌梗死直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者中,桡动脉与股动脉入路与对比剂诱导的急性肾损伤的相关性。
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016 Dec;17(8):546-551. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2016.07.008. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
7
Radial or femoral access in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): Does the choice matters?经桡动脉或股动脉入路行直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI):选择重要吗?
Indian Heart J. 2020 May-Jun;72(3):166-171. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2020.05.004. Epub 2020 May 21.
8
Transradial versus transfemoral access for female patients who underwent primary PCI in STEMI: Two years follow-up data from acute STEMI interventional registry.ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者行直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗时经桡动脉与经股动脉入路:急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死介入登记研究的两年随访数据
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Aug;217 Suppl:S16-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.06.222. Epub 2016 Jun 28.
9
Meta-Analysis of Transradial vs Transfemoral Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction.经桡动脉与经股动脉入路行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2021 Feb 15;141:23-30. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.11.016. Epub 2020 Nov 18.
10
Radial versus femoral access for primary percutaneous interventions in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.经桡动脉与股动脉入路行直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗急性 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的随机对照试验的荟萃分析
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Aug;6(8):814-23. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.04.010.

引用本文的文献

1
Local nitroglycerin to facilitate radial arterial catheterization in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.局部应用硝酸甘油促进成人桡动脉置管:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Can J Anaesth. 2025 Apr;72(4):567-578. doi: 10.1007/s12630-025-02931-5. Epub 2025 Mar 19.
2
Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors May Modulate the Clinical Benefit of Radial Access as Compared to Femoral Access in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Regression and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.糖蛋白 IIb/IIIa 抑制剂可能会改变与股动脉入路相比,经桡动脉入路在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的临床获益:一项随机试验的荟萃回归和荟萃分析。
J Interv Cardiol. 2021 Jun 15;2021:9917407. doi: 10.1155/2021/9917407. eCollection 2021.
3
Index Admission and Thirty-Day Readmission Outcomes of Patients With Cancer Presenting With STEMI.
癌症合并 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的入院和 30 天再入院结局。
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2022 Feb;35:121-128. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2021.04.015. Epub 2021 Apr 16.
4
Factors associated with poor clinical outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with door-to-balloon time <90 minutes.与门球时间<90 分钟的 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者临床预后不良相关的因素。
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 22;15(10):e0241251. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241251. eCollection 2020.