冠心病患者冠状动脉介入治疗两种路径的比较  

Comparism study on percutaneous coronary intervention procedure of CAD patients through two defferent artery accesses

作　　者：祝鹏[1] 谢静[1] 任晖[1] 刘胜强[1] 屈兰燕[1] 郑时康[1] 王甲文[1] 

机构地区：[1]安康市中心医院心内科,陕西安康725000

出　　处：《心脏杂志》2013年第2期194-196,共3页Chinese Heart Journal

摘　　要：目的:比较冠心病患者冠状动脉介入治疗两种路径,以说明经桡动脉路径的优越性。方法:选择行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的423例冠心病患者,按采用的路径分为经桡动脉路径组(桡动脉组,213例)和经股动脉路径组(股动脉组,210例),分析两组间首次穿刺置管成功率、手术成功率、平均住院日及术后并发症的发生率。结果:两组间首次穿刺置管成功率、手术成功率比较无显著差异。桡动脉组平均住院日、局部血肿、尿潴留、失眠、烦躁及并发症的总发生率均显著低于股动脉组,两组间比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:经桡动脉路径行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗安全可行,可以作为首选路径。AIM： To explore the advantages of percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） through tran- sradial artery access. METHODS： A total of 423 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention treatment were divided into two groups： patient group of 213 patients with PCI through transradial artery access and control group of 210 patients with PCI through transfemoral artery. The rate of one-time suc- cessful catheterization, success rate of PCI, mean hospital stay and incidence rates of postoperative com- plications were analyzed and compared. RESULTS： The incidence rate of postoperative complications in case group was much lower than in control group （P 〈 0. 05 ）. CONCLUSION ： Percutaneous coronary intervention treatment approach. through transradial artery access is safe and feasible and should be the first choice

关 键 词：冠状动脉疾病 经皮冠状动脉介入治疗术 并发症 经桡动脉介入 

分 类 号：R541.4[医药卫生—心血管疾病]