• 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

相似文献

1
Routine Ultrasonography Guidance for Femoral Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures: The UNIVERSAL Randomized Clinical Trial.常规超声引导在心脏介入手术中的股动脉血管入路应用:UNIVERSAL 随机临床试验
JAMA Cardiol. 2022 Nov 1;7(11):1110-1118. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2022.3399.
2
Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial.经桡动脉与股动脉入路行冠状动脉造影和介入治疗急性冠状动脉综合征患者的随机、平行分组、多中心试验(RIVAL)
Lancet. 2011 Apr 23;377(9775):1409-20. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2. Epub 2011 Apr 4.
3
Design and Rationale of Routine ltrasoud Gudance for ascular Accss fo Cardiac Procedure: Randomized Tria (UNIVERSAL).心脏手术血管通路常规超声引导的设计与原理:随机试验(通用试验)
CJC Open. 2022 Aug 30;4(12):1074-1080. doi: 10.1016/j.cjco.2022.08.011. eCollection 2022 Dec.
4
Safety and Efficacy of Femoral Access vs Radial Access in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The SAFARI-STEMI Randomized Clinical Trial.股动脉入路与桡动脉入路在 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死中的安全性和疗效:SAFARI-STEMI 随机临床试验。
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Feb 1;5(2):126-134. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.4852.
5
Real-time ultrasound guidance facilitates femoral arterial access and reduces vascular complications: FAUST (Femoral Arterial Access With Ultrasound Trial).实时超声引导有助于股动脉入路并减少血管并发症:FAUST(超声引导股动脉入路试验)。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010 Jul;3(7):751-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.04.015.
6
Ultrasound-guided femoral access in patients with vascular closure devices: a prespecified analysis of the randomised UNIVERSAL trial.超声引导下使用血管闭合装置的股动脉入路:随机 UNIVERSAL 试验的预设分析。
EuroIntervention. 2023 May 15;19(1):73-79. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-22-01130.
7
A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial.一项基于注册的随机临床试验比较了女性行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗时桡动脉和股动脉入路:SAFE-PCI for Women(女性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗入路增强研究)试验。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Aug;7(8):857-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.04.007.
8
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.
9
Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmark approach for femoral artery access in coronary angiography: A randomized controlled trial and a meta-analysis.冠状动脉造影中股动脉穿刺的超声引导与解剖标志法:一项随机对照试验和荟萃分析
J Interv Cardiol. 2018 Aug;31(4):496-503. doi: 10.1111/joic.12492. Epub 2018 Jan 25.
10
Standard versus ultrasound-guided radial and femoral access in coronary angiography and intervention (SURF): a randomised controlled trial.标准桡动脉与超声引导股动脉入路在冠状动脉造影及介入治疗中的比较(SURF):一项随机对照试验。
EuroIntervention. 2019 Aug 9;15(6):e522-e530. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00336.

引用本文的文献

1
Rotarex Debulking in a Subtotal Occlusion of the Common Femoral Artery After Intimal Protrusion Caused by a Vascular Closure (StarClose) Device.血管闭合(StarClose)装置导致内膜突出后股总动脉次全闭塞的Rotarex减容术
Clin Case Rep. 2025 Aug 14;13(8):e70689. doi: 10.1002/ccr3.70689. eCollection 2025 Aug.
2
A Six-Step Approach for Optimizing Ultrasound-Guided Femoral Artery Access.优化超声引导下股动脉穿刺的六步法
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2025 Aug;106(2):1023-1031. doi: 10.1002/ccd.31646. Epub 2025 Jun 2.
3
Prevention and management of complications associated with arterial catheters.动脉导管相关并发症的预防与管理。
BJA Educ. 2025 May;25(5):173-180. doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2024.12.003. Epub 2025 Feb 25.
4
Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided percutaneous femoral artery access.超声引导与解剖标志引导下经皮股动脉穿刺入路
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 28;3(3):CD014594. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014594.pub2.
5
Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Detection of Vascular Access Site Complications-The ULTRASITCOM Study.用于检测血管通路部位并发症的床旁超声——ULTRASITCOM研究
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025 Feb 18;4(2):102516. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2024.102516. eCollection 2025 Feb.
6
Ultrasound-guided vs. Non-ultrasound-guided femoral artery puncture techniques: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.超声引导与非超声引导股动脉穿刺技术:一项全面的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Ultrasound J. 2025 Mar 6;17(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s13089-025-00422-8.
7
Brachial artery approach for managing retroperitoneal bleed following coronary intervention for STEMI.急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死冠状动脉介入术后腹膜后出血的肱动脉处理方法
Br J Cardiol. 2023 Nov 29;30(4):45. doi: 10.5837/bjc.2023.045. eCollection 2023.
8
Scrotal hematoma: a rare complication of transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention.阴囊血肿:经股动脉冠状动脉介入治疗的一种罕见并发症。
Egypt Heart J. 2024 Sep 6;76(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s43044-024-00552-9.
9
ESR Essentials: arterial vascular access and closure devices-practice recommendations by the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe.红细胞沉降率要点:动脉血管通路与闭合装置——欧洲心血管和介入放射学会的实践建议
Eur Radiol. 2025 Apr;35(4):1858-1867. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11053-3. Epub 2024 Sep 3.
10
Design and Rationale of the Safe Surveillance of PCI Under Mechanical Circulatory Support With the Saranas Early Bird Bleed Monitoring System (SAFE-MCS) Study.使用Saranas早期出血监测系统(SAFE-MCS)对机械循环支持下的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗进行安全监测的研究设计与原理
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2023 Jul 5;2(5):101049. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101049. eCollection 2023 Sep-Oct.

本文引用的文献

1
Design and Rationale of Routine ltrasoud Gudance for ascular Accss fo Cardiac Procedure: Randomized Tria (UNIVERSAL).心脏手术血管通路常规超声引导的设计与原理:随机试验(通用试验)
CJC Open. 2022 Aug 30;4(12):1074-1080. doi: 10.1016/j.cjco.2022.08.011. eCollection 2022 Dec.
2
The Learning Curves for Transradial and Ultrasound-Guided Arterial Access: An Analysis of the SURF Trial.经桡动脉与超声引导动脉入路学习曲线:SURF 试验分析。
Heart Lung Circ. 2021 Sep;30(9):1329-1336. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2021.02.006. Epub 2021 Mar 12.
3
Ultrasound Guidance to Reduce Vascular and Bleeding Complications of Percutaneous Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison.超声引导降低经皮经股动脉主动脉瓣置换术血管和出血并发症:倾向评分匹配比较。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Mar 17;9(6):e014916. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.014916. Epub 2020 Mar 16.
4
A prospective, randomized study comparing ultrasound versus fluoroscopic guided femoral arterial access in noncardiac vascular patients.一项前瞻性、随机研究比较了非心脏血管患者中超声与透视引导下股动脉入路的效果。
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Jul;72(1):259-267. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.09.051. Epub 2020 Jan 21.
5
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.《随机对照试验偏倚风险评估工具2:修订版》
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.
6
Ultrasound Guidance in Femoral Artery Catheterization: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.股动脉插管中的超声引导:一项系统评价和随机对照试验的荟萃分析
J Invasive Cardiol. 2019 Jul;31(7):E192-E198.
7
Standard versus ultrasound-guided radial and femoral access in coronary angiography and intervention (SURF): a randomised controlled trial.标准桡动脉与超声引导股动脉入路在冠状动脉造影及介入治疗中的比较(SURF):一项随机对照试验。
EuroIntervention. 2019 Aug 9;15(6):e522-e530. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00336.
8
Comparison of Ultrasound Guidance and Conventional Method for Common Femoral Artery Cannulation: A Prospective Study of 939 Patients.超声引导与传统方法用于股总动脉插管的比较:939例患者的前瞻性研究
Acta Cardiol Sin. 2018 Sep;34(5):394-398. doi: 10.6515/ACS.201809_34(5).20180524A.
9
Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmark approach for femoral artery access in coronary angiography: A randomized controlled trial and a meta-analysis.冠状动脉造影中股动脉穿刺的超声引导与解剖标志法:一项随机对照试验和荟萃分析
J Interv Cardiol. 2018 Aug;31(4):496-503. doi: 10.1111/joic.12492. Epub 2018 Jan 25.
10
Transfemoral Approach for Coronary Angiography and Intervention: A Collaboration of International Cardiovascular Societies.经股动脉入路行冠状动脉造影及介入治疗:国际心血管学会协作。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Nov 27;10(22):2269-2279. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.08.035.

常规超声引导在心脏介入手术中的股动脉血管入路应用:UNIVERSAL 随机临床试验

Routine Ultrasonography Guidance for Femoral Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures: The UNIVERSAL Randomized Clinical Trial.

机构信息

Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA Cardiol. 2022 Nov 1;7(11):1110-1118. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2022.3399.

DOI:10.1001/jamacardio.2022.3399
PMID:36116089
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9483833/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE

A significant limitation of femoral artery access for cardiac interventions is the increased risk of vascular complications and bleeding compared with radial access. Strategies to make femoral access safer are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether routinely using ultrasonography guidance for femoral arterial access for coronary angiography/intervention reduces bleeding or vascular complications.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Routine Ultrasound Guidance for Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures (UNIVERSAL) randomized clinical trial is a multicenter, prospective, open-label trial of ultrasonography-guided femoral access vs no ultrasonography for coronary angiography or intervention with planned femoral access. Patients were randomized from June 26, 2018, to April 26, 2022. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were not eligible.

INTERVENTIONS

Ultrasonography guidance vs no ultrasonography guidance for femoral arterial access on a background of fluoroscopic landmarking.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary composite outcome is the composite of major bleeding based on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 criteria or major vascular complications within 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 621 patients were randomized at 2 centers in Canada (mean [SD] age, 71 [10.24] years; 158 [25.4%] female). The primary outcome occurred in 40 of 311 patients (12.9%) in the ultrasonography group vs 50 of 310 patients (16.1%) without ultrasonography (odds ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.49-1.20]; P = .25). The rates of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding were 10.0% (31 of 311) vs 10.7% (33 of 310) (odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.55-1.56]; P = .78). The rates of major vascular complications were 6.4% (20 of 311) vs 9.4% (29 of 310) (odds ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.37-1.20]; P = .18). Ultrasonography improved first-pass success (277 of 311 [86.6%] vs 222 of 310 [70.0%]; odds ratio, 2.76 [95% CI, 1.85-4.12]; P < .001) and reduced the number of arterial puncture attempts (mean [SD], 1.2 [0.5] vs 1.4 [0.8]; mean difference, -0.26 [95% CI, -0.37 to -0.16]; P < .001) and venipuncture (10 of 311 [3.1%] vs 37 of 310 [11.7%]; odds ratio, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.12-0.50]; P < .001) with similar times to access (mean [SD], 114 [185] vs 129 [206] seconds; mean difference, -15.1 [95% CI, -45.9 to 15.8]; P = .34). All prerandomization prespecified subgroups were consistent with the overall finding.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, use of ultrasonography for femoral access did not reduce bleeding or vascular complications. However, ultrasonography did reduce the risk of venipuncture and number of attempts. Larger trials may be required to demonstrate additional potential benefits of ultrasonography-guided access.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03537118.

摘要

重要性

与桡动脉入路相比,股动脉入路进行心脏介入治疗的一个显著局限性是增加了血管并发症和出血的风险。需要制定使股动脉入路更安全的策略。

目的

确定常规使用超声引导进行冠状动脉造影/介入治疗的股动脉入路是否减少出血或血管并发症。

设计、设置和参与者:常规超声引导用于心脏手术的血管入路(UNIVERSAL)是一项多中心、前瞻性、开放标签的临床试验,比较了超声引导与无超声引导用于计划股动脉入路的冠状动脉造影或介入治疗。患者于 2018 年 6 月 26 日至 2022 年 4 月 26 日随机分组。ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者不符合条件。

干预措施

股动脉入路的超声引导与透视标志下的无超声引导。

主要结果和措施

主要复合结局是基于 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2、3 或 5 标准的主要出血或 30 天内主要血管并发症的复合。

结果

在加拿大的 2 个中心共随机分配了 621 名患者(平均[标准差]年龄 71[10.24]岁;158[25.4%]名女性)。在超声组,311 名患者中有 40 名(12.9%)发生主要结局,而 310 名无超声组患者中有 50 名(16.1%)(比值比,0.77[95%CI,0.49-1.20];P = .25)。Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2、3 或 5 级出血的发生率分别为 10.0%(31/311)和 10.7%(33/310)(比值比,0.93[95%CI,0.55-1.56];P = .78)。主要血管并发症的发生率分别为 6.4%(20/311)和 9.4%(29/310)(比值比,0.67[95%CI,0.37-1.20];P = .18)。超声检查提高了初次通过成功率(277/311[86.6%] vs 222/310[70.0%];比值比,2.76[95%CI,1.85-4.12];P < .001),减少了动脉穿刺次数(平均[标准差],1.2[0.5] vs 1.4[0.8];平均差异,-0.26[95%CI,-0.37 至-0.16];P < .001)和静脉穿刺(311 例中 10 例[3.1%] vs 310 例中 37 例[11.7%];比值比,0.24[95%CI,0.12-0.50];P < .001),但到达时间相似(平均[标准差],114[185] vs 129[206]秒;平均差异,-15.1[95%CI,-45.9 至 15.8];P = .34)。所有预先设定的亚组均与总体结果一致。

结论和相关性

在这项随机临床试验中,股动脉入路使用超声检查并没有减少出血或血管并发症。然而,超声检查确实降低了静脉穿刺和尝试次数的风险。可能需要更大规模的试验来证明超声引导入路的额外潜在益处。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT03537118。