Suppr超能文献

经桡动脉入路在慢性完全闭塞经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的应用:来自 PROGRESS-CTO 注册研究的见解。

Distal Radial Access in Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the PROGRESS-CTO Registry.

机构信息

Minneapolis Heart Institute, 920 E. 28th Street #300, Minneapolis, MN 55407 USA.

出版信息

J Invasive Cardiol. 2021 Sep;33(9):E717-E722. doi: 10.25270/jic/20.00300. Epub 2021 Aug 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of distal radial access (dRA) in chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (CTO-PCI) have received limited study.

METHODS

We compared the clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics of 120 CTO-PCIs performed via dRA access with 2625 CTO-PCIs performed via proximal radial access (pRA) in a large, multicenter registry.

RESULTS

The dRA group had lower mean PROGRESS-CTO score than the pRA group (1.0 ± 1 vs 1.2 ± 1, respectively; P=.05), while J-CTO score (2.4 ± 1.2 vs 2.3 ± 1.3; P=.43) and PROGRESS-CTO Complications score (2.8 ± 1.8 vs 2.6 ± 1.9; P=.16) were similar in the dRA vs pRA groups, respectively. Technical success was similar in the 2 groups (90% dRA vs 86% pRA; P=.14). Concomitant use of femoral access did not alter procedural success. The incidence of major periprocedural adverse cardiac events was similar in the 2 groups (0.8% dRA vs 2.4% pRA; P=.26), whereas the incidence of tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis was lower with dRA (0% dRA vs 4.69% pRA; P<.001), as was air kerma radiation dose (median, 1.7 Gy; interquartile range [IQR], 0.97-2.63 Gy in the dRA group vs median, 2.27 Gy; IQR, 1.2-3.9 Gy in the pRA group; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of dRA in CTO-PCI is associated with similar procedural success and risk of complications as compared with pRA.

摘要

背景

桡动脉远端入路(dRA)在慢性完全闭塞经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(CTO-PCI)中的结局研究较少。

方法

我们比较了在一个大型多中心注册中心中,120 例经 dRA 入路的 CTO-PCI 和 2625 例经近端桡动脉入路(pRA)的 CTO-PCI 的临床、血管造影和手术特征。

结果

dRA 组的 PROGRESS-CTO 评分均值低于 pRA 组(分别为 1.0 ± 1 比 1.2 ± 1,P =.05),而 J-CTO 评分(2.4 ± 1.2 比 2.3 ± 1.3,P =.43)和 PROGRESS-CTO 并发症评分(2.8 ± 1.8 比 2.6 ± 1.9,P =.16)在 dRA 组和 pRA 组之间相似。两组的技术成功率相似(90% dRA 比 86% pRA;P =.14)。股动脉入路的同时使用并未改变手术成功率。两组主要围手术期心脏不良事件的发生率相似(0.8% dRA 比 2.4% pRA;P =.26),但 dRA 组发生需要心包穿刺的心包填塞的发生率较低(0% dRA 比 4.69% pRA;P<.001),空气比释动能辐射剂量也较低(中位数,dRA 组为 1.7 Gy;四分位距 [IQR],0.97-2.63 Gy;pRA 组中位数为 2.27 Gy;IQR,1.2-3.9 Gy;P<.001)。

结论

与 pRA 相比,CTO-PCI 中使用 dRA 与相似的手术成功率和并发症风险相关。

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