Percolse、Angio-Seal血管闭合器与人工压迫止血在急诊冠脉介入治疗中的应用  

Application of Percolse,Angio-Seal Vascular Closure Devices or Manual Compression in Emergency Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

作　　者：杨铎[1] 李南[1] 高海[1] 朱小玲[1] 

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院抢救中心,北京市100029

出　　处：《中国康复理论与实践》2010年第9期861-862,共2页Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice

摘　　要：目的评价Percolse、Angio-Seal血管闭合器与人工压迫止血在急诊冠脉介入治疗中安全性和有效性。方法 603例接受急诊冠脉介入治疗的患者分为人工压迫组160例、Perclose组237例和Angio-Seal组206例,观察各组止血时间、制动时间及血管并发症的发生情况。结果血管闭合器各组止血时间和制动时间明显短于人工压迫组(均P<0.01);血管并发症的发生率明显低于人工压迫组(均P<0.01);Perclose组与Angio-Seal组比较无显著性差异(P>0.05);各组间止血成功率比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论急诊冠脉介入治疗中应用Perclose和Angio-Seal血管闭合器是安全、可靠的止血方法。Objective To assess the value of Percolse,Angio-Seal vascular closure devices in emergency percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods603 patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention were divided into manual compression group（n=160）,Perclose group（n=237）and Angio-Seal group（n=206）.The time of hemostasis,time of immobilization and the incidence of vascular complications were observed in each group.ResultsThe time of hemostasis,time of immobilization in vascular closure devices groups were significantly shorter than those in manual compression group（P〈0.01）.The incidence of vascular complications were significantly lower than those in manual compression group（P〈0.01）.There was no difference between Perclose group and Angio-Seal group（P〈0.05）.The rate of successful hemostasis was not significantly different among each group（P〈0.05）.ConclusionThe Perclose and Angio-Seal vascular closure device is safe and reliable hemostasis in emergency percutaneous coronary intervention.

关 键 词：血管闭合器 急诊冠脉介入 止血 并发症 

分 类 号：R541.4[医药卫生—心血管疾病]