经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路子宫动脉栓塞的比较:一项随机临床试验。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Acta radiologica Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-17 DOI:10.1177/02841851241297818
Ahmed A Bessar, Yasmin Ibrahim Libda, Maichael Talaat, Enjy Fathy Tantawy, Ahmed Ismail Heraiz, Manar A Bessar
{"title":"经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路子宫动脉栓塞的比较:一项随机临床试验。","authors":"Ahmed A Bessar, Yasmin Ibrahim Libda, Maichael Talaat, Enjy Fathy Tantawy, Ahmed Ismail Heraiz, Manar A Bessar","doi":"10.1177/02841851241297818","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundUterine artery embolization (UAE) is a procedure commonly used to control uterine bleeding or pain. While the procedure is traditionally performed through the transfemoral approach (TFA), the transradial approach (TRA) is another method.PurposeTo compare the effectiveness of the UAE using the TRA approach versus the TFA approach.Material and MethodsThis non-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2022. A total of 42 female patients with abnormal uterine bleeding and/or pelvic pain from uterine fibroids were randomly assigned to either the TRA group or the TFA group. Data collected included demographic information, procedural details, patient satisfaction, and radiation metrics.ResultsThe TRA group had significantly lower numbers of microsphere vials used compared to the TFA group (<i>P</i> = 0.014). While there were no significant differences in procedure times (<i>P</i> = 0.058), fluoroscopic times (<i>P</i> = 0.117), or radiation doses (<i>P</i> = 0.466), the TRA approach was associated with a higher success rate in achieving bilateral UA catheterization and fewer instances of bilateral sheath insertion. Patient satisfaction scores were similar between the groups, with no statistically significant difference (<i>P</i> = 0.932). Minor adverse events such as local hematoma and color changes were more frequent in the TFA group, though these differences were not statistically significant.ConclusionAlthough both approaches were effective for the UAE, the TRA approach may be a viable alternative to the TFA due to its higher success rate in achieving bilateral catheterization, lower radiation doses, and shorter procedural times.</p>","PeriodicalId":7143,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica","volume":" ","pages":"165-173"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the transradial and transfemoral approaches for uterine artery embolization: a randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed A Bessar, Yasmin Ibrahim Libda, Maichael Talaat, Enjy Fathy Tantawy, Ahmed Ismail Heraiz, Manar A Bessar\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02841851241297818\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BackgroundUterine artery embolization (UAE) is a procedure commonly used to control uterine bleeding or pain. While the procedure is traditionally performed through the transfemoral approach (TFA), the transradial approach (TRA) is another method.PurposeTo compare the effectiveness of the UAE using the TRA approach versus the TFA approach.Material and MethodsThis non-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2022. A total of 42 female patients with abnormal uterine bleeding and/or pelvic pain from uterine fibroids were randomly assigned to either the TRA group or the TFA group. Data collected included demographic information, procedural details, patient satisfaction, and radiation metrics.ResultsThe TRA group had significantly lower numbers of microsphere vials used compared to the TFA group (<i>P</i> = 0.014). While there were no significant differences in procedure times (<i>P</i> = 0.058), fluoroscopic times (<i>P</i> = 0.117), or radiation doses (<i>P</i> = 0.466), the TRA approach was associated with a higher success rate in achieving bilateral UA catheterization and fewer instances of bilateral sheath insertion. Patient satisfaction scores were similar between the groups, with no statistically significant difference (<i>P</i> = 0.932). Minor adverse events such as local hematoma and color changes were more frequent in the TFA group, though these differences were not statistically significant.ConclusionAlthough both approaches were effective for the UAE, the TRA approach may be a viable alternative to the TFA due to its higher success rate in achieving bilateral catheterization, lower radiation doses, and shorter procedural times.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7143,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta radiologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"165-173\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta radiologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851241297818\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851241297818","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:子宫动脉栓塞术(UAE)是一种常用的手术来控制子宫出血或疼痛。传统的手术方法是经股骨入路(TFA),经桡骨入路(TRA)是另一种方法。目的:比较使用TRA方法与TFA方法的阿联酋的有效性。材料和方法:这项非盲法随机临床试验于2019年1月1日至2022年6月30日在一家三级医院进行。42例因子宫肌瘤引起的子宫异常出血和/或盆腔疼痛的女性患者被随机分为TRA组和TFA组。收集的数据包括人口统计信息、手术细节、患者满意度和放疗指标。结果:TRA组微球瓶使用量显著低于TFA组(P = 0.014)。虽然在手术时间(P = 0.058)、透视时间(P = 0.117)或辐射剂量(P = 0.466)方面没有显著差异,但TRA入路在实现双侧UA置管方面的成功率更高,双侧鞘插入的情况更少。两组患者满意度评分相近,差异无统计学意义(P = 0.932)。局部血肿和颜色变化等轻微不良事件在TFA组更频繁,尽管这些差异没有统计学意义。结论:虽然两种入路都对UAE有效,但TRA入路可能是TFA的可行选择,因为其实现双侧导管的成功率更高,辐射剂量更低,手术时间更短。
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 the transradial and transfemoral approaches for uterine artery embolization: a randomized clinical trial.

BackgroundUterine artery embolization (UAE) is a procedure commonly used to control uterine bleeding or pain. While the procedure is traditionally performed through the transfemoral approach (TFA), the transradial approach (TRA) is another method.PurposeTo compare the effectiveness of the UAE using the TRA approach versus the TFA approach.Material and MethodsThis non-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2022. A total of 42 female patients with abnormal uterine bleeding and/or pelvic pain from uterine fibroids were randomly assigned to either the TRA group or the TFA group. Data collected included demographic information, procedural details, patient satisfaction, and radiation metrics.ResultsThe TRA group had significantly lower numbers of microsphere vials used compared to the TFA group (P = 0.014). While there were no significant differences in procedure times (P = 0.058), fluoroscopic times (P = 0.117), or radiation doses (P = 0.466), the TRA approach was associated with a higher success rate in achieving bilateral UA catheterization and fewer instances of bilateral sheath insertion. Patient satisfaction scores were similar between the groups, with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.932). Minor adverse events such as local hematoma and color changes were more frequent in the TFA group, though these differences were not statistically significant.ConclusionAlthough both approaches were effective for the UAE, the TRA approach may be a viable alternative to the TFA due to its higher success rate in achieving bilateral catheterization, lower radiation doses, and shorter procedural times.

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
Acta radiologica
Acta radiologica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Radiologica publishes articles on all aspects of radiology, from clinical radiology to experimental work. It is known for articles based on experimental work and contrast media research, giving priority to scientific original papers. The distinguished international editorial board also invite review articles, short communications and technical and instrumental notes.
×
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