桡动脉与股动脉途径冠心病介入治疗临床观察  

Clinical Observation on the Interventional Treatment of Radial Artery and Femoral Artery Approach for Coronary Heart Disease

作　　者：王稳[1] 杨松[1] 陈燕春[1] 蒋建东[1] 任军[1] 蒋超旦[1] 赵祥海[1] 徐亮[1] 

机构地区：[1]宜兴市人民医院,江苏宜兴214200

出　　处：《中外医疗》2014年第28期30-32,共3页China & Foreign Medical Treatment

摘　　要：目的探讨经桡动脉(Transradia approach coronary intervention,TRA)与经股动脉(Transfemoral approach coronary intervention,TFA)两种途径行冠心病(Coronary heart disease,CHD)介入治疗的临床效果差异。方法选择2010—2014年曾在该院接受治疗的冠心病患者1 000例,将患者随机分为数量相等的两组即观察组与对照组进,对照组中患者以经股动脉(TFA)冠状动脉介入方法进行治疗,观察组中患者以经桡动脉(TRA)冠状动脉介入方法进行治疗,观察两组患者所得到的临床效果。结果治疗结束后,观察组中患者的治疗成功率为96.0%,对照组中患者的治疗成功率为92.0%,两组患者之间差异显著;比较两组患者的穿刺时间、手术时间以及造影剂量:观察组中患者的穿刺时间及手术之间均短于对照组,观察组中患者的造影剂量少于对照组,两组患者之间差异较明显;观察组中患者的并发症发生率为4.0%,对照组中患者的并发症发生率为16.0%,两组患者直接差异较明显。结论经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉介入治疗是安全、有效的方法。桡动脉途径与股动脉途径冠状动脉介入冠心病均能够得到较好的效果,经桡动脉途径冠状动脉介入方法的穿刺时间、手术时间、术后并发症发生率均少于经股动脉冠状动脉介入方法,有利于患者尽快康复,临床上可优先选择经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉介入治疗。Objective To study the difference in clinical effect between transradial artery（TRA） percutaneous coronary intervention and transfemoral artery（TFA） percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of coronary heart disease（CHD）. Methods 1000 cases with CHD treated in our hospital from 2010 to 2014 were selected and randomly and equally divided into the observation group and the control group. Patients in the control group were treated by transfemoral artery（TFA） percutaneous coronary intervention; and patients in the observation group were treated with transradial artery（TRA） percutaneous coronary intervention. The clinical effects were compared between the two groups. Results After the treatment, the treatment success rate was 96.0% in the observation group and 92.0% in the control group, there was significant difference between two groups of patients; Comparing the two groups of patients with puncture time, operation time and the amount of contrast agent used： The puncture time and surgical time of patients in the observation group were shorter than those in the control group, contrast agent dosage used in the observation group was less than that used in the control group, the difference between two groups of patients was obvious; The incidence of complications of patients in the observation group was 4.0%, and that in the control group was 16.0%, the direct difference between the two groups of patients was significant. Conclusion Transradial artery percutaneous coronary intervention is safe and effective. Both transradial artery percutaneous coronary intervention and transfemoral artery percutaneous coronary intervention can achieve good results, but the puncture time, operation time and the incidence of postoperative complications of the former are less than those of the latter, which is conducive to the early rehabilitation of the patients, so transradial artery percutaneous coronary intervention can be a priority selection in clinical practice.

关 键 词：桡动脉冠状动脉介入 股动脉冠状动脉介入 冠心病 

分 类 号：R541.4[医药卫生—心血管疾病]