Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, El Paso, TX, 79905, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, El Paso, TX, 79905, USA.
Indian Heart J. 2021 May-Jun;73(3):362-364. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2021.03.005. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
We performed a prospective observational study of 215 patients (58 ± 11 years) and compared the outcomes of ultrasound guided ulnar (n = 98, 45.6%) vs. radial (n = 117, 54.4%) cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients selected by an ultrasound based algorithm. Primary endpoints included the number of access attempts and conversion to femoral access. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, repeat revascularization, stent thrombosis, in-stent restenosis, and access site complications. No significant difference was found in the primary endpoints between radial or ulnar. Ulnar access showed no significant hematomas. Therefore, ulnar PCI is a feasible alternative.
我们进行了一项前瞻性观察研究，共纳入 215 例患者（58 ± 11 岁），并比较了超声引导下尺骨（n = 98，45.6%）与桡骨（n = 117，54.4%）心导管术和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）在超声算法选择的患者中的结局。主要终点包括入路尝试次数和转为股动脉入路的比例。次要终点包括全因死亡率、心源性死亡率、心肌梗死、卒中和再次血运重建、支架血栓形成、支架内再狭窄和入路部位并发症。桡骨或尺骨在主要终点方面无显著差异。尺骨入路无明显血肿。因此，尺骨 PCI 是一种可行的替代方法。
