经桡动脉入路诊断脑血管造影的围手术期卒中发生率

A. Kuhn, J. Singh, K. de Macedo Rodrigues, F. Massari, A. Puri
{"title":"经桡动脉入路诊断脑血管造影的围手术期卒中发生率","authors":"A. Kuhn, J. Singh, K. de Macedo Rodrigues, F. Massari, A. Puri","doi":"10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-snis.42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction/Purpose Over the past few years, transradial access for neurointerventions has gained more popularity due to extrapolated interventional cardiology data, patient preference and early reports of feasibility using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of periprocedural stroke in patients undergoing radial versus femoral access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms. Materials and Methods Retrospective review of our prospectively maintained neurointerventional database and identification of all patients who underwent a diagnostic cerebral angiogram between May 2019 and July 2021. These patients were further divided into radial versus femoral access. Patients in whom postprocedural stroke symptoms were identified were recorded. In those patients, symptoms and NIHSS were collected. Pertinent laboratory values and procedural data was reviewed, including COVID status, platelet count, INR, GFR, vessels catheterized, amount of contrast used, and fluoroscopy time. Patient imaging work-up for stroke symptoms was reviewed, if available. Results A total of 1238 diagnostic cases were performed between table 1 for a detailed overview. Conclusion In our experience, transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms was associated with a low but not neglectable incidence of periprocedural strokes when compared to the traditional femoral approach. Patient vascular anatomy should be evaluated prior to selection of vascular access and patients should be made aware of the possibility of a slightly higher possibility of periprocedural stroke with transradial access. (Figure Presented).","PeriodicalId":375113,"journal":{"name":"SNIS 19th annual meeting oral abstracts","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"O-042 Incidence of periprocedural stroke with radial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms\",\"authors\":\"A. Kuhn, J. Singh, K. de Macedo Rodrigues, F. Massari, A. Puri\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-snis.42\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction/Purpose Over the past few years, transradial access for neurointerventions has gained more popularity due to extrapolated interventional cardiology data, patient preference and early reports of feasibility using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of periprocedural stroke in patients undergoing radial versus femoral access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms. Materials and Methods Retrospective review of our prospectively maintained neurointerventional database and identification of all patients who underwent a diagnostic cerebral angiogram between May 2019 and July 2021. These patients were further divided into radial versus femoral access. Patients in whom postprocedural stroke symptoms were identified were recorded. In those patients, symptoms and NIHSS were collected. Pertinent laboratory values and procedural data was reviewed, including COVID status, platelet count, INR, GFR, vessels catheterized, amount of contrast used, and fluoroscopy time. Patient imaging work-up for stroke symptoms was reviewed, if available. Results A total of 1238 diagnostic cases were performed between table 1 for a detailed overview. Conclusion In our experience, transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms was associated with a low but not neglectable incidence of periprocedural strokes when compared to the traditional femoral approach. Patient vascular anatomy should be evaluated prior to selection of vascular access and patients should be made aware of the possibility of a slightly higher possibility of periprocedural stroke with transradial access. (Figure Presented).\",\"PeriodicalId\":375113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SNIS 19th annual meeting oral abstracts\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SNIS 19th annual meeting oral abstracts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-snis.42\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SNIS 19th annual meeting oral abstracts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-snis.42","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的几年中,由于外推的介入心脏病学数据、患者偏好和使用该方法可行性的早期报告,经桡骨神经介入越来越受欢迎。我们的目的是评估行桡动脉与股动脉造影诊断的患者术中卒中的发生率。材料和方法对我们前瞻性维护的神经介入数据库和2019年5月至2021年7月期间接受诊断性脑血管造影的所有患者的身份进行回顾性分析。这些患者进一步分为桡骨通路和股骨通路。对手术后卒中症状确定的患者进行记录。收集患者的症状和NIHSS。审查相关实验室值和程序数据,包括COVID状态、血小板计数、INR、GFR、导管插管、造影剂用量和透视时间。如有可能,对患者卒中症状的影像学检查进行了回顾。结果在表1之间进行了1238例诊断病例的详细概述。根据我们的经验,与传统的股动脉入路相比,经桡动脉入路进行诊断性脑血管造影与低但不可忽视的围手术期卒中发生率相关。在选择血管通路之前,应评估患者血管解剖,并使患者意识到经桡动脉通路围手术期卒中的可能性略高。(图)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
O-042 Incidence of periprocedural stroke with radial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms
Introduction/Purpose Over the past few years, transradial access for neurointerventions has gained more popularity due to extrapolated interventional cardiology data, patient preference and early reports of feasibility using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of periprocedural stroke in patients undergoing radial versus femoral access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms. Materials and Methods Retrospective review of our prospectively maintained neurointerventional database and identification of all patients who underwent a diagnostic cerebral angiogram between May 2019 and July 2021. These patients were further divided into radial versus femoral access. Patients in whom postprocedural stroke symptoms were identified were recorded. In those patients, symptoms and NIHSS were collected. Pertinent laboratory values and procedural data was reviewed, including COVID status, platelet count, INR, GFR, vessels catheterized, amount of contrast used, and fluoroscopy time. Patient imaging work-up for stroke symptoms was reviewed, if available. Results A total of 1238 diagnostic cases were performed between table 1 for a detailed overview. Conclusion In our experience, transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms was associated with a low but not neglectable incidence of periprocedural strokes when compared to the traditional femoral approach. Patient vascular anatomy should be evaluated prior to selection of vascular access and patients should be made aware of the possibility of a slightly higher possibility of periprocedural stroke with transradial access. (Figure Presented).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信