Department of Interventional Cardiology and Radiology, Botkin Hospital, Moscow, Russia;Department of Interventional Cardiology and Radiology, Emergency Hospital, Omsk, Russia;Department of Roentgen-Endovascular Methods of Diagnosis and Treatment PHDPO, PHGBOU VO Pirogov RNRMU, Moscow, Russia.
Department of Interventional Cardiology and Radiology, Emergency Hospital, Omsk, Russia.
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2021 Jan;27(1):59-64. doi: 10.5152/dir.2020.19574.
We aimed to compare duration of uterine artery embolization, radiation exposure, safety and quality of life associated with the procedure in patients undergoing uterine artery embolization using transradial and transfemoral access.
This randomized controlled trial was conducted from February 2013 to March 2017 in three hospitals. Transradial access was used in 78 patients and transfemoral access in 75 patients. Clinical characteristics of the patients were comparable between the two groups. Patients were evaluated for the success and duration of the procedure, radiation exposure, major and minor complications. Quality of life associated with the procedure was assessed among patients with uterine fibroids.
Embolization procedures were successfully performed in all patients in both groups. The duration of uterine artery embolization (32.27±7.99 vs. 39.24±9.72 minutes, P < 0.001), uterine artery catheterization time (12.36±5.73 vs. 19.08±6.06 minutes, P < 0.001) and radiation exposure (0.28±0.14 vs. 0.5±0.21 mZv, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the transradial access group. The rate of major (0% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.37) and minor (11.53% vs. 17.3%, P = 0.42) complications was comparable between the two groups. Transradial access was associated with a statistically significant improvement in the quality of life associated with the procedure among patients with uterine fibroids.
Transradial access in uterine artery embolization has the same efficacy and safety compared to transfemoral access. This access reduces radiation exposure and duration of the procedure.
本研究旨在比较经桡动脉和股动脉入路行子宫动脉栓塞术（UAE）的患者的栓塞时间、辐射暴露、安全性和与手术相关的生活质量。
这是一项于 2013 年 2 月至 2017 年 3 月在 3 家医院进行的随机对照试验。78 例患者采用经桡动脉入路，75 例患者采用经股动脉入路。两组患者的临床特征相似。评估患者的手术成功率和时间、辐射暴露、主要和次要并发症。对接受子宫肌瘤治疗的患者进行与手术相关的生活质量评估。
两组患者的栓塞术均成功完成。子宫动脉栓塞时间（32.27±7.99 分钟 vs. 39.24±9.72 分钟，P＜0.001）、子宫动脉导管插入时间（12.36±5.73 分钟 vs. 19.08±6.06 分钟，P＜0.001）和辐射暴露（0.28±0.14 mZv vs. 0.5±0.21 mZv，P＜0.001）均显著低于经桡动脉入路组。两组的主要（0% vs. 2.7%，P=0.37）和次要并发症发生率（11.53% vs. 17.3%，P=0.42）相当。经桡动脉入路与接受子宫肌瘤治疗的患者手术相关生活质量的显著改善相关。
与股动脉入路相比，经桡动脉入路行 UAE 具有相同的疗效和安全性。这种入路方式减少了辐射暴露和手术时间。
