髂动脉EVT经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路手术效率比较:回顾性研究。

IF 5.8 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Tomohide Endo, Kazumasa Saito, Shuntaro Sakai, Daisuke Horiuchi, Hiromitsu Matsui
{"title":"髂动脉EVT经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路手术效率比较:回顾性研究。","authors":"Tomohide Endo, Kazumasa Saito, Shuntaro Sakai, Daisuke Horiuchi, Hiromitsu Matsui","doi":"10.1007/s12928-025-01182-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transradial access (TRA) is increasingly used in endovascular therapy (EVT) due to its favorable safety profile. However, its procedural efficiency compared to transfemoral access (TFA) remains under investigation. We retrospectively analyzed 132 consecutive EVT procedures for iliac artery lesions performed between April 2020 and March 2024. After excluding 11 dialysis-dependent and 3 urgent cases, 118 elective cases were included (TRA: 65; TFA: 53). Four procedural time intervals were assessed: (1) room entry to local anesthesia, (2) local anesthesia to sheath removal, (3) sheath removal to room exit, and (4) total room time. In the primary analysis, 45 matched pairs were created using propensity score matching based on five covariates: chronic total occlusion (CTO), bilateral calcification, TASC C/D lesions, stent occlusion, and covered stent use. A secondary analysis was performed in 19 matched CTO cases using three covariates. In the matched cohort, TRA demonstrated significantly shorter total room time compared to TFA (75 [60-115] vs. 105 [74-163] min, p = 0.003). Sheath removal to room exit time was also consistently shorter in the TRA group (7 [5-10] vs. 14 [12-17] min, p < 0.001). Similar findings were observed in the CTO-matched subgroup (93 [77-163] vs. 160 [110-220] min, p = 0.012). TRA significantly reduces procedural time compared to TFA in iliac artery EVT. The consistent reduction across all phases, including the post-procedural period, highlights TRA as an efficient and practical access strategy in peripheral vascular interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9439,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of procedural efficiency between transradial and transfemoral access in iliac artery EVT: a retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Tomohide Endo, Kazumasa Saito, Shuntaro Sakai, Daisuke Horiuchi, Hiromitsu Matsui\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12928-025-01182-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Transradial access (TRA) is increasingly used in endovascular therapy (EVT) due to its favorable safety profile. However, its procedural efficiency compared to transfemoral access (TFA) remains under investigation. We retrospectively analyzed 132 consecutive EVT procedures for iliac artery lesions performed between April 2020 and March 2024. After excluding 11 dialysis-dependent and 3 urgent cases, 118 elective cases were included (TRA: 65; TFA: 53). Four procedural time intervals were assessed: (1) room entry to local anesthesia, (2) local anesthesia to sheath removal, (3) sheath removal to room exit, and (4) total room time. In the primary analysis, 45 matched pairs were created using propensity score matching based on five covariates: chronic total occlusion (CTO), bilateral calcification, TASC C/D lesions, stent occlusion, and covered stent use. A secondary analysis was performed in 19 matched CTO cases using three covariates. In the matched cohort, TRA demonstrated significantly shorter total room time compared to TFA (75 [60-115] vs. 105 [74-163] min, p = 0.003). Sheath removal to room exit time was also consistently shorter in the TRA group (7 [5-10] vs. 14 [12-17] min, p < 0.001). Similar findings were observed in the CTO-matched subgroup (93 [77-163] vs. 160 [110-220] min, p = 0.012). TRA significantly reduces procedural time compared to TFA in iliac artery EVT. The consistent reduction across all phases, including the post-procedural period, highlights TRA as an efficient and practical access strategy in peripheral vascular interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-025-01182-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-025-01182-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于其良好的安全性,经桡动脉通路(TRA)越来越多地用于血管内治疗(EVT)。然而,与经股入路(TFA)相比,其手术效率仍在研究中。我们回顾性分析了2020年4月至2024年3月期间连续132例髂动脉病变EVT手术。排除11例透析依赖病例和3例急诊病例后,纳入118例选择性病例(TRA: 65例;TFA: 53例)。评估了四个程序时间间隔:(1)进入房间到局部麻醉,(2)局部麻醉到鞘鞘取出,(3)鞘鞘取出到房间,(4)总房间时间。在初步分析中,基于五个协变量:慢性全闭塞(CTO)、双侧钙化、TASC C/D病变、支架闭塞和覆膜支架使用,使用倾向评分匹配创建了45对配对。使用三个协变量对19例匹配的CTO病例进行二次分析。在匹配的队列中,TRA与TFA相比,总房间时间明显更短(75 [60-115]vs. 105[74-163]分钟,p = 0.003)。TRA组从鞘鞘取出到离开房间的时间也一直较短(7 [5-10]vs. 14[12-17]分钟,p . 571
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 procedural efficiency between transradial and transfemoral access in iliac artery EVT: a retrospective study.

Transradial access (TRA) is increasingly used in endovascular therapy (EVT) due to its favorable safety profile. However, its procedural efficiency compared to transfemoral access (TFA) remains under investigation. We retrospectively analyzed 132 consecutive EVT procedures for iliac artery lesions performed between April 2020 and March 2024. After excluding 11 dialysis-dependent and 3 urgent cases, 118 elective cases were included (TRA: 65; TFA: 53). Four procedural time intervals were assessed: (1) room entry to local anesthesia, (2) local anesthesia to sheath removal, (3) sheath removal to room exit, and (4) total room time. In the primary analysis, 45 matched pairs were created using propensity score matching based on five covariates: chronic total occlusion (CTO), bilateral calcification, TASC C/D lesions, stent occlusion, and covered stent use. A secondary analysis was performed in 19 matched CTO cases using three covariates. In the matched cohort, TRA demonstrated significantly shorter total room time compared to TFA (75 [60-115] vs. 105 [74-163] min, p = 0.003). Sheath removal to room exit time was also consistently shorter in the TRA group (7 [5-10] vs. 14 [12-17] min, p < 0.001). Similar findings were observed in the CTO-matched subgroup (93 [77-163] vs. 160 [110-220] min, p = 0.012). TRA significantly reduces procedural time compared to TFA in iliac artery EVT. The consistent reduction across all phases, including the post-procedural period, highlights TRA as an efficient and practical access strategy in peripheral vascular interventions.

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
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) is an international journal covering the field of cardiovascular disease and includes cardiac (coronary and noncoronary) and peripheral interventions and therapeutics. Articles are subject to peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability. CVIT is an official journal of The Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.
×
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