• 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

终末期肾病患者经桡动脉与经股动脉行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的心血管结局:基于回归的比较

Cardiovascular outcomes of transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in End-Stage renal Disease: A Regression-Based comparison.

作者信息

Sattar Yasar, Faisaluddin Mohammed, Almas Talal, Alhajri Noora, Shah Rajendra, Zghouzi Mohamed, Zafrullah Fnu, Sengodon Prasana M, Zia Khan Muhammad, Ullah Waqas, Alam Mahboob, Balla Sudharshan, Lakkis Nasser, Kawsara Akram, Daggubati Ramesh, Chadi Alraies M

机构信息

West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.

Rochester General Hospital, NY, USA.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2022 Aug 23;43:101110. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2022.101110. eCollection 2022 Dec.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijcha.2022.101110
PMID:36051245
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9424587/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Limited data is available on the comparison of outcomes of transradial (TR) and transfemoral (TF) access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with end-stage stage renal disease (ESRD).

METHODS

Online databases were queried to compare cardiovascular outcomes among TR. and TF in ESRD patients. The outcomes assessed included differences in mortality, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI), bleeding, transfusion, and periprocedural cardiogenic shock (CS). Unadjusted odds ratios (OR) were calculated using a random-effect effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies including 7,607 patients (TR-PCI = 1,288; TF-PCI = 6,319) were included. The overall mean age was 67.7 years, while the mean age for TR-PCI and TF-PCI was 69.7 years and 67.9 years, respectively. TR-PCI was associated with lower incidence of mortality (OR 0.46 95 % CI 0.30-0.70, p < 0.05, I2 0.00 %), bleeding (OR 0.45 95 % CI 0.29, 0.68, p < 0.05, I2 3.48 %), and transfusion requirement (OR 0.52 95 % CI 0.40, 0.67, p < 0.05, I2 0.00 %) (Fig. 1). There were no differences among TR-PCI and TF-PCI for periprocedural MI, periprocedural CS, and CVA outcomes.

CONCLUSION

TR access was associated with lower mortality, bleeding, and transfusion requirement as compared to TF access in patients with ESRD undergoing PCI.

摘要

背景

关于终末期肾病(ESRD)患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中经桡动脉(TR)和经股动脉(TF)入路结局比较的数据有限。

方法

查询在线数据库以比较ESRD患者中TR和TF的心血管结局。评估的结局包括死亡率、脑血管意外(CVA)、围手术期心肌梗死(MI)、出血、输血和围手术期心源性休克(CS)的差异。使用随机效应模型计算未调整的优势比(OR)。

结果

共纳入6项研究,包括7607例患者(TR-PCI = 1288;TF-PCI = 6319)。总体平均年龄为67.7岁,而TR-PCI和TF-PCI的平均年龄分别为69.7岁和67.9岁。TR-PCI与较低的死亡率(OR 0.46,95%CI 0.30-0.70,p < 0.05,I2 0.00%)、出血(OR 0.45,95%CI 0.29,0.68,p < 0.05,I2 3.48%)和输血需求(OR 0.52,95%CI 0.40,0.67,p < 0.05,I2 0.00%)相关(图1)。TR-PCI和TF-PCI在围手术期MI、围手术期CS和CVA结局方面没有差异。

结论

在接受PCI的ESRD患者中,与TF入路相比,TR入路与较低的死亡率、出血和输血需求相关。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/921c/9424587/6e04504dc15b/gr4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/921c/9424587/61a19bf78f5d/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/921c/9424587/6e04504dc15b/gr4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/921c/9424587/61a19bf78f5d/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/921c/9424587/6e04504dc15b/gr4.jpg

相似文献

1
Cardiovascular outcomes of transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in End-Stage renal Disease: A Regression-Based comparison.终末期肾病患者经桡动脉与经股动脉行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的心血管结局:基于回归的比较
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2022 Aug 23;43:101110. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2022.101110. eCollection 2022 Dec.
2
Meta-Analysis Comparing Gender-Based Cardiovascular Outcomes of Transradial Versus Transfemoral Access of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗经桡动脉与经股动脉入路的性别相关心血管结局的荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2022 Jan 1;162:49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.08.059.
3
Meta-Analysis of Transradial Versus Transfemoral Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中慢性肾脏病患者经桡动脉与股动脉入路的荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2021 Oct 15;157:8-14. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.07.018. Epub 2021 Aug 11.
4
Outcomes of Transradial Versus Transfemoral Access of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in STEMI: Systematic Review and Updated Meta-analysis.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中经桡动脉与经股动脉入路的结局比较:系统评价和更新的荟萃分析。
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2021 May;19(5):433-444. doi: 10.1080/14779072.2021.1915768. Epub 2021 Apr 28.
5
Association Between Maximal Activated Clotting Time and Major Bleeding Complications During Transradial and Transfemoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.经桡动脉和股动脉经皮冠状动脉介入治疗时最大激活凝血时间与大出血并发症的关系。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jun 11;11(11):1036-1045. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.01.257. Epub 2018 May 16.
6
Transradial versus transfemoral approach for percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock: A radial-first centre experience and meta-analysis of published studies.经桡动脉与经股动脉途径用于心源性休克患者的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:来自桡动脉优先中心的经验及已发表研究的荟萃分析
Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2015 Nov;108(11):563-75. doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2015.06.005. Epub 2015 Sep 11.
7
Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention of left main disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.经桡动脉与经股动脉入路行左主干病变经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的比较:一项观察性研究的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Aug 1;94(2):264-273. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28025. Epub 2018 Dec 10.
8
Institutional Switch from Transfemoral to Transradial Vascular Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention was Associated with a Reduction in Bleeding Events: A Singlecenter Experience of >10,000 Consecutive Cases.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中从股动脉血管通路转换为桡动脉血管通路与出血事件减少相关:超过10000例连续病例的单中心经验
J Interv Cardiol. 2015 Jun;28(3):296-304. doi: 10.1111/joic.12205.
9
A prospective randomised comparison of minor bleedings in transradial vs. transfemoral access percutaneous coronary interventions for STEMI: a new FEMORAL bleeding classification.经桡动脉与经股动脉途径行急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(STEMI)时轻微出血的前瞻性随机对照研究:一种新的股动脉出血分类法
Kardiol Pol. 2014;72(9):790-7. doi: 10.5603/KP.a2014.0109. Epub 2014 May 20.
10
Transradial and transfemoral coronary angiography and interventions: 1-year outcomes after initiating the transradial approach in a cardiology training program.经桡动脉和股动脉冠状动脉造影和介入治疗:在心脏病学培训计划中启动经桡动脉入路后的 1 年结果。
Am Heart J. 2013 Mar;165(3):310-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.10.014. Epub 2012 Nov 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Meta-Analysis of Transradial Versus Transfemoral Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中慢性肾脏病患者经桡动脉与股动脉入路的荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2021 Oct 15;157:8-14. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.07.018. Epub 2021 Aug 11.
2
Distal transradial access: a review of the feasibility and safety in cardiovascular angiography and intervention.经桡动脉远端入路:心血管造影和介入治疗的可行性和安全性评价。
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2020 Aug 5;20(1):356. doi: 10.1186/s12872-020-01625-8.
3
Outcomes of Transradial Approach to Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients on Dialysis.
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗在终末期肾病透析患者中的桡动脉入路治疗效果。
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Sep;21(9):1131-1135. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.01.017. Epub 2020 Jan 25.
4
Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease.经桡动脉入径的冠状动脉介入治疗在晚期慢性肾脏病患者中的应用。
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Sep;21(9):1138-1143. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.02.004. Epub 2020 Feb 12.
5
Radial Access Use for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Dialysis Patients.桡动脉入路在透析患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的应用
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan;13(1):e008418. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008418. Epub 2020 Jan 9.
6
The assessment of coronary artery disease in patients with end-stage renal disease.终末期肾病患者的冠状动脉疾病评估
Clin Kidney J. 2019 Aug 14;12(5):721-734. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfz088. eCollection 2019 Oct.
7
Cardiogenic Shock.心源性休克
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Apr 16;8(8):e011991. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.011991.
8
Trans-radial percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with severe chronic renal insufficiency and/or on dialysis.经桡动脉途径对严重慢性肾功能不全和/或正在接受透析治疗的患者进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。
Heart Vessels. 2019 Sep;34(9):1412-1419. doi: 10.1007/s00380-019-01387-0. Epub 2019 Mar 22.
9
Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的急性冠状动脉综合征患者中桡动脉入路与股动脉入路和比伐卢定与普通肝素的比较(MATRIX):一项多中心、随机对照试验的最终 1 年结果。
Lancet. 2018 Sep 8;392(10150):835-848. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31714-8. Epub 2018 Aug 25.
10
The Transradial Approach for Coronary Intervention: More Comfort, Better Outcome.经桡动脉途径进行冠状动脉介入治疗:更舒适,预后更佳。
Korean Circ J. 2018 Aug;48(8):728-730. doi: 10.4070/kcj.2018.0118.