A comparative study of stepping angiography and traditional segmental angiography in lower limb anterograde venography.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of International Medical Research Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-30 DOI:10.1177/03000605251361099
Hongzhi Sun, Lei Qi, Guoliang Wang, Huagang Li, Peng Ji, Maoneng Hu
{"title":"A comparative study of stepping angiography and traditional segmental angiography in lower limb anterograde venography.","authors":"Hongzhi Sun, Lei Qi, Guoliang Wang, Huagang Li, Peng Ji, Maoneng Hu","doi":"10.1177/03000605251361099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo compare the application value of stepping angiography and traditional segmental angiography in lower limb anterograde venography.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted among 95 patients who underwent lower limb anterograde venography at the Hefei Third People's Hospital and the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Chinese Medicine from September 2021 to December 2024. Among them, 50 patients who underwent traditional segmental angiography were assigned to the control group, while 45 patients who underwent stepping angiography were assigned to the observation group. Comparative assessments were performed between the two groups regarding image quality, angiography time, absorbed radiation dose, contrast agent dosage, and incidence of complications.ResultsThe image quality in the observation group was better than that in the control group. The average angiography time in the control group was 27.87 ± 4.98 min, while that in the observation group was 10.23 ± 2.88 min (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>0.013). The average absorbed radiation dose in the control group was 4.65 ± 1.32 Gy, while that in the observation group was 3.53 ± 0.73 Gy (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>0.008). The average contrast agent dosage in the control group was 69.42 ± 10.42 mL, while that in the observation group was 47.51 ± 8.14 mL (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>0.011). Two complications occurred in the control group, while three occurred in the observation group (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>0.339).ConclusionFor lower limb venous lesions, stepping angiography is superior to traditional segmental angiography in terms of overall image quality and practicality. Stepping angiography is a simpler and quicker process, and only a small dose of radiation is absorbed by both doctors and patients; moreover, it requires a lower dosage of contrast agent. It plays an important objective guiding role in the decision-making of treatment plans for lower limb venous diseases.</p>","PeriodicalId":16129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Medical Research","volume":"53 7","pages":"3000605251361099"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605251361099","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare the application value of stepping angiography and traditional segmental angiography in lower limb anterograde venography.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted among 95 patients who underwent lower limb anterograde venography at the Hefei Third People's Hospital and the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Chinese Medicine from September 2021 to December 2024. Among them, 50 patients who underwent traditional segmental angiography were assigned to the control group, while 45 patients who underwent stepping angiography were assigned to the observation group. Comparative assessments were performed between the two groups regarding image quality, angiography time, absorbed radiation dose, contrast agent dosage, and incidence of complications.ResultsThe image quality in the observation group was better than that in the control group. The average angiography time in the control group was 27.87 ± 4.98 min, while that in the observation group was 10.23 ± 2.88 min (P =0.013). The average absorbed radiation dose in the control group was 4.65 ± 1.32 Gy, while that in the observation group was 3.53 ± 0.73 Gy (P =0.008). The average contrast agent dosage in the control group was 69.42 ± 10.42 mL, while that in the observation group was 47.51 ± 8.14 mL (P =0.011). Two complications occurred in the control group, while three occurred in the observation group (P =0.339).ConclusionFor lower limb venous lesions, stepping angiography is superior to traditional segmental angiography in terms of overall image quality and practicality. Stepping angiography is a simpler and quicker process, and only a small dose of radiation is absorbed by both doctors and patients; moreover, it requires a lower dosage of contrast agent. It plays an important objective guiding role in the decision-making of treatment plans for lower limb venous diseases.

步进血管造影与传统节段性血管造影在下肢顺行静脉造影中的比较研究。
目的比较步进血管造影与传统分段血管造影在下肢顺行静脉造影中的应用价值。方法回顾性分析2021年9月至2024年12月在合肥市第三人民医院和安徽中医药大学第一附属医院行下肢顺行静脉造影的患者95例。其中,50例行传统节段性血管造影的患者作为对照组,45例行步进血管造影的患者作为观察组。比较两组影像质量、造影时间、辐射吸收剂量、造影剂剂量、并发症发生率。结果观察组图像质量优于对照组。对照组平均造影时间为27.87±4.98 min,观察组平均造影时间为10.23±2.88 min (P = 0.013)。对照组平均吸收辐射剂量为4.65±1.32 Gy,观察组平均吸收辐射剂量为3.53±0.73 Gy,差异有统计学意义(P = 0.008)。对照组对比剂平均用量为69.42±10.42 mL,观察组对比剂平均用量为47.51±8.14 mL,差异有统计学意义(P = 0.011)。对照组出现2例并发症,观察组出现3例并发症(P = 0.339)。结论对于下肢静脉病变,步进血管造影在整体图像质量和实用性上均优于传统的分段血管造影。步进血管造影是一种更简单、更快速的过程,医生和病人都只吸收一小剂量的辐射;此外,它需要较低剂量的造影剂。对下肢静脉疾病治疗方案的制定具有重要的客观指导作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: _Journal of International Medical Research_ is a leading international journal for rapid publication of original medical, pre-clinical and clinical research, reviews, preliminary and pilot studies on a page charge basis. As a service to authors, every article accepted by peer review will be given a full technical edit to make papers as accessible and readable to the international medical community as rapidly as possible. Once the technical edit queries have been answered to the satisfaction of the journal, the paper will be published and made available freely to everyone under a creative commons licence. Symposium proceedings, summaries of presentations or collections of medical, pre-clinical or clinical data on a specific topic are welcome for publication as supplements. Print ISSN: 0300-0605
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信