经股、径路冠状动脉造影放射剂量和造影剂体积的比较

Q4 Medicine
Hidayat Ullah, Muhammad Shafique Arshad, Zabih Ullah, Abdul Rehman, Muhammad Khalil, Nouman Khan
{"title":"经股、径路冠状动脉造影放射剂量和造影剂体积的比较","authors":"Hidayat Ullah, Muhammad Shafique Arshad, Zabih Ullah, Abdul Rehman, Muhammad Khalil, Nouman Khan","doi":"10.54393/pjhs.v4i09.1109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Coronary angiography is a common procedure used to identify coronary artery disease. Whether femoral or radial vascular access is employed may impact radiation dosage and contrast dye utilization. This study examined radiation exposure and contrast dye volume in femoral and radial approach in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Objective: To assess and compare the radiation dosage and contrast dye volume between patients having coronary angiography through the femoral and radial routes. Methods: A prospective study included 408 consecutive coronary angiography patients from April 10 to August 31, 2023. The remaining 206 patients were treated radially, while 202 were treated femorally. We examined radiation exposure, dose area product (DAP), and contrast dye volume among groups. Results: Radial and femoral groups had similar mean ages (64.4±12.1 vs. 64.8±11.6, p=0.86). The radial group had 60.67% men versus 71.3% in femoral group. Radial and femoral catheterization radiation doses were 1.199 Gy (0.677-2.001) and 1.218 Gy (0.696-2.207), respectively, with a p-value of 0.88 showing no group radiation exposure difference. The group analysis found no hemorrhagic consequences from radial or femoral catheterization, coronarography, or angioplasty. Conclusions: The study participants noticed non-significant differences in contrast dye volume and radiation dose between femoral and radial coronary angiography.","PeriodicalId":45690,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Radiation Dose and Contrast Dye Volume Comparison in Coronary Angiography Via Femoral and Radial Routes\",\"authors\":\"Hidayat Ullah, Muhammad Shafique Arshad, Zabih Ullah, Abdul Rehman, Muhammad Khalil, Nouman Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.54393/pjhs.v4i09.1109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Coronary angiography is a common procedure used to identify coronary artery disease. Whether femoral or radial vascular access is employed may impact radiation dosage and contrast dye utilization. This study examined radiation exposure and contrast dye volume in femoral and radial approach in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Objective: To assess and compare the radiation dosage and contrast dye volume between patients having coronary angiography through the femoral and radial routes. Methods: A prospective study included 408 consecutive coronary angiography patients from April 10 to August 31, 2023. The remaining 206 patients were treated radially, while 202 were treated femorally. We examined radiation exposure, dose area product (DAP), and contrast dye volume among groups. Results: Radial and femoral groups had similar mean ages (64.4±12.1 vs. 64.8±11.6, p=0.86). The radial group had 60.67% men versus 71.3% in femoral group. Radial and femoral catheterization radiation doses were 1.199 Gy (0.677-2.001) and 1.218 Gy (0.696-2.207), respectively, with a p-value of 0.88 showing no group radiation exposure difference. The group analysis found no hemorrhagic consequences from radial or femoral catheterization, coronarography, or angioplasty. Conclusions: The study participants noticed non-significant differences in contrast dye volume and radiation dose between femoral and radial coronary angiography.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v4i09.1109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v4i09.1109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

冠状动脉造影是一种常用的诊断冠状动脉疾病的方法。采用股骨或桡动脉血管通路可能影响辐射剂量和造影剂的使用。本研究检查了接受冠状动脉造影的患者股骨和桡动脉入路的辐射暴露和造影剂体积。目的:评价和比较经股路和经桡动脉行冠状动脉造影患者的放射剂量和造影剂体积。方法:前瞻性研究纳入2023年4月10日至8月31日连续408例冠状动脉造影患者。其余206例患者采用桡骨治疗,202例采用股骨治疗。我们检查了各组间的辐射暴露、剂量面积积(DAP)和造影剂体积。结果:桡骨组和股骨组平均年龄相近(64.4±12.1∶64.8±11.6,p=0.86)。桡骨组为60.67%,股骨组为71.3%。桡骨和股骨置管放射剂量分别为1.199 Gy(0.677-2.001)和1.218 Gy (0.696-2.207), p值为0.88,各组放射暴露无差异。组内分析未发现桡动脉或股动脉导管、冠状造影或血管成形术的出血后果。结论:研究参与者注意到股动脉和桡动脉冠状动脉造影在造影剂体积和辐射剂量上没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Radiation Dose and Contrast Dye Volume Comparison in Coronary Angiography Via Femoral and Radial Routes
Coronary angiography is a common procedure used to identify coronary artery disease. Whether femoral or radial vascular access is employed may impact radiation dosage and contrast dye utilization. This study examined radiation exposure and contrast dye volume in femoral and radial approach in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Objective: To assess and compare the radiation dosage and contrast dye volume between patients having coronary angiography through the femoral and radial routes. Methods: A prospective study included 408 consecutive coronary angiography patients from April 10 to August 31, 2023. The remaining 206 patients were treated radially, while 202 were treated femorally. We examined radiation exposure, dose area product (DAP), and contrast dye volume among groups. Results: Radial and femoral groups had similar mean ages (64.4±12.1 vs. 64.8±11.6, p=0.86). The radial group had 60.67% men versus 71.3% in femoral group. Radial and femoral catheterization radiation doses were 1.199 Gy (0.677-2.001) and 1.218 Gy (0.696-2.207), respectively, with a p-value of 0.88 showing no group radiation exposure difference. The group analysis found no hemorrhagic consequences from radial or femoral catheterization, coronarography, or angioplasty. Conclusions: The study participants noticed non-significant differences in contrast dye volume and radiation dose between femoral and radial coronary angiography.
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
Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences
Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences is an international biomedical journal from Pakistan. We publish materials of interest to the practitioners and scientists in the broad field of medicine. Articles describing original qualitative, quantitative, human/animal clinical or laboratory studies are considered for publication.
×
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