Department of Cardiology, University Heart Center Berlin and Charite University Medicine Berlin, Campus Benjamin-Franklin (CBF), 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Department of Cardiology, University Heart Center Berlin and Charite University Medicine Berlin, Campus Benjamin-Franklin (CBF), 12203 Berlin, Germany; German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Site Berlin, 10115 Berlin, Germany.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2022 Oct;43:49-54. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2022.05.001. Epub 2022 May 6.
The present sub-analysis from the randomized UDDC-Radial-Trial sought to compare one-catheter concepts (OCC) with two-catheter concepts (TCC) in different patient subgroups, particularly in those depending on gender and age.
There is an ongoing debate regarding potential performance differences of OCC compared to TCC for transradial coronary angiography in specific patient subgroups.
The randomized UDDC-Radial-Trial enrolled a total of 300 patients planed for coronary angiography in a 2:1 ratio to either OCC by Tiger II (n = 100) and BLK (n = 100) or TCC by Judkins (n = 100) catheters. Predefined patient subgroups stratified for age, gender and patient constitution were analyzed with regard to the primary outcome measure of time required for a complete coronary angiography.
In male patients time for coronary angiography was significantly shorter in the TCC group compared to the OCC group (510 ± 37 s vs. 615 ± 35 s; p = 0.046). No difference between the catheter concepts was observed in the subset of female patients (525 ± 34 s vs. 583 ± 54 s; p = 0.43). TCC was associated with shorter coronary angiography time in patients aged <71 years compared to OCC (462 ± 23 s vs. 570 ± 38 s; p = 0.018). In patients ≥72 years of age no difference was detected (573 ± 41 s vs. 636 ± 45 s; p = 0.31). Other subgroups showed no relevant differences in angiography time among OCC and TCC.
The present subgroup analysis from the UDDC-radial trial demonstrates the use of OCC in transradial diagnostic angiography to be inferior compared to TCC in terms of angiography time in younger and male patients.
本项来自 UDDC-Radial 试验的亚组分析旨在比较单导管概念（OCC）与双导管概念（TCC）在不同患者亚组中的差异，特别是在那些基于性别和年龄的患者亚组中。
对于特定患者亚组中经桡动脉行冠状动脉造影术，OCC 与 TCC 的潜在性能差异仍存在争议。
UDDC-Radial 试验共纳入 300 例计划行冠状动脉造影术的患者，按 2:1 的比例随机分为 OCC 组（Tiger II 导管 100 例，BLK 导管 100 例）和 TCC 组（Judkins 导管 100 例）。根据年龄、性别和患者体质对预设的患者亚组进行分层，主要终点为完成冠状动脉造影术所需的时间。
男性患者中，TCC 组的冠状动脉造影时间明显短于 OCC 组（510 ± 37 s 比 615 ± 35 s；p = 0.046）。在女性患者亚组中，两种导管概念之间无差异（525 ± 34 s 比 583 ± 54 s；p = 0.43）。与 OCC 相比，TCC 可缩短<71 岁患者的冠状动脉造影时间（462 ± 23 s 比 570 ± 38 s；p = 0.018）。在≥72 岁的患者中，未检测到差异（573 ± 41 s 比 636 ± 45 s；p = 0.31）。其他亚组中，OCC 和 TCC 之间的造影时间无显著差异。
UDDC-radial 试验的本次亚组分析表明，在经桡动脉诊断性血管造影中，OCC 的使用在时间方面劣于 TCC，特别是在年轻和男性患者中。
