4F与5F造影导管经桡动脉径路行冠脉造影对比分析  

A Comparison of Diagnostic Coronary Angiography via Transradial Approach with 4F and 5F Universal Catheter

作　　者：董鹏[1] 李镝[1] 靳维华[1] 曲涛[1] 王斌[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京航天中心医院心内科,100039

出　　处：《中国全科医学》2007年第19期1602-1603,共2页Chinese General Practice

摘　　要：目的研究使用4F造影导管经桡动脉径路诊断性冠状动脉造影的特点及与5F共用型造影导管的区别。方法选择经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影患者354例,按其造影开始时选用的共用型造影导管不同分为4F导管组(n=143)和5F导管组(n=211)。对比观察两组患者造影成功率、X线透视时间、手术操作时间及痉挛和闭塞的发生率。结果两组患者造影成功率间差别无显著性意义(P>0.05)。两组患者冠状动脉平均X线透视时间及手术操作时间间差别均有显著性意义(P<0.05)。两组患者导管打折率及痉挛发生率间差别均有显著性意义(P<0.05)。两组均未出现血管闭塞或神经损伤等并发症。结论使用4F造影导管经桡动脉径路诊断性冠状动脉造影与常用的5F造影导管相比造影成功率无明显差异;采用4F造影导管经桡动脉径路诊断性冠状动脉造影的X线透视时间和手术操作时间明显延长,且导管打折率增加,但痉挛发生率降低。Objective To study the characteristic of the diagnostic coronary angiography via transradial approach with 4Fcatheter, as compared with that with 5F catheter. Methods Totally 354 patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography via transradial approach were divided as 4F group （ with 4F universal catheter,n= 143） and 5F group （with 5F universal catheter, n=211）. The success rate, the durations of fluoroscopy and operation and the prevalence of coronary occlusion and spasm between the groups were compared. Results There was no significant difference in success rate between the two groups （P〉0.05）. There was a significant difference in average durations of operation and fluoroscopy between the two groups. There were significant differences in the prevalence of catheter folding and coronary spasm between groups （P〈0.05）. Conclusion The success rate of the diagnostic coronary angiography via transradial approach with 4Fcatheter is the same as that with 5F catheter. The durations of fluoroscopy and operation of the diagnostic coronary angiography via transradial approach with 4Fcatheter are obviously prolonged, and the prevalence of catheter folding is decreased; however its prevalence of coronary spasm is decreased.

关 键 词：冠状动脉造影 桡动脉 共用型造影导管 

分 类 号：R541.4[医药卫生—心血管疾病]