急性冠状动脉综合征老年患者经不同途径下行经皮冠状动脉介入术疗效的对比  

A comparative study on transradial vs transfemoral artery access for percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome

作　　者：曹立平[1] 李剑波[2] 

机构地区：[1]安庆市第一人民医院心内一科,安徽安庆246003 [2]南京医科大学第一附属医院内科,江苏南京210029

出　　处：《临床和实验医学杂志》2015年第3期180-183,共4页Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine

基　　金：国家自然科学基金资助项目(编号:81070655)

摘　　要：目的研究分析急性冠状动脉综合征老年患者经桡动脉以及经股动脉两种途径行经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)疗效的异同,以指导临床实践。方法选取于2009年1月至2013年12月期间行PCI的老年患者80例,随机分为A、B两组,分别为行经桡动脉PCI组34例和经股动脉PCI组46例,对比两组手术疗效及术后40 d内并发症发生率的差异。结果经对比发现,老年患者经桡动脉途径和经股动脉途径行PCI治疗的手术效果及术后40 d内的严重并发症发生率无明显差异(P>0.05),但经桡动脉组平均住院天数较短,与操作相关的不良事件和心脏外局部并发症发生率低于经股动脉组(P<0.05)。结论经股动脉途径或经桡动脉途径行PCI对于一般老年患者均可选择。经桡动脉途径较经股动脉途径行PCI术的手术时间较短,并发症较少,但两种途径的疗效无显著差异。Objective To compare the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention via transradial and transfemoral artery access in treatment of elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome in order to guide the clinical practice. Methods A total of 80 elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome during January 2009 to December 2013 were allocated in this study. All these patients were randomly divided into two groups（ A and B） with two different pathways. The information of efficacy of PCI and complications within 40 days were collected in order to compare and analyze the difference between them. Results After comparative analysis,it had been found that there was no statistically significant difference between these two groups（ P 0. 05） in efficacy of PCI and complications within 40 days,while the operating time,average hospital stay and local complications of patients in group A were significantly less than those of patients in group B（ P 0. 05）. Conclusion In comparison with the transfemoral acess,transradial acess has shorter average hospital stay,but there is no significant difference in the effect of percutaneous coronary intervention

关 键 词：急性冠脉综合征 经皮冠脉介入术 桡动脉 股动脉 

分 类 号：R541.4[医药卫生—心血管疾病]