经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路诊断性脑血管造影的围手术期中风率比较。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 Medicine
Interventional Neuroradiology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2022-11-30 DOI:10.1177/15910199221142653
Anna Luisa Kuhn, Ajit S Puri, Katyucia de Macedo Rodrigues, Francesco Massari, Jasmeet Singh
{"title":"经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路诊断性脑血管造影的围手术期中风率比较。","authors":"Anna Luisa Kuhn, Ajit S Puri, Katyucia de Macedo Rodrigues, Francesco Massari, Jasmeet Singh","doi":"10.1177/15910199221142653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Transradial access for neurointerventional procedures has increased in popularity over the past few years due to data from extrapolated interventional cardiology studies, patient preference, and early reports of feasibility using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of periprocedural stroke in patients undergoing transradial versus transfemoral access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed our neurointerventional database and identified all patients who underwent a diagnostic angiogram between May 2019 and July 2021. Patients were further divided into transradial versus transfemoral access. In patients with postprocedural stroke, symptoms and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score were recorded. Pertinent laboratory values and procedural data was reviewed, including COVID status, platelet count, International normalized ratio (INR), Glomerular filtration rate (GFR), vessels catheterized, amount of contrast used, and fluoroscopy time. Imaging work-up for stroke symptoms was reviewed, if available.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thousand two-hundred thirty eight diagnostic cerebral angiograms with 656 patients (53%) undergoing transradial access. Stroke symptoms after angiogram were only observed in the transradial group (5 patients; 0.4% total and 0.8% among radial access cases, respectively). Symptoms included word finding difficulty, paresthesia, or weakness. Three patients underwent cross-sectional imaging, computed tomography was negative in all three patients. Magnetic resonance imaging showed small, scattered infarcts in two patients. All symptoms resolved without additional hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our experience, using transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms was associated with a low but not negligible incidence of periprocedural strokes. Patient anatomy should be evaluated prior to selection of vascular access. Patients should be made aware of a slightly higher periprocedural stroke risk with transradial access.</p>","PeriodicalId":14380,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neuroradiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11569464/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rate of periprocedural stroke in diagnostic cerebral angiograms comparing transradial versus transfemoral access.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Luisa Kuhn, Ajit S Puri, Katyucia de Macedo Rodrigues, Francesco Massari, Jasmeet Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15910199221142653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Transradial access for neurointerventional procedures has increased in popularity over the past few years due to data from extrapolated interventional cardiology studies, patient preference, and early reports of feasibility using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of periprocedural stroke in patients undergoing transradial versus transfemoral access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed our neurointerventional database and identified all patients who underwent a diagnostic angiogram between May 2019 and July 2021. Patients were further divided into transradial versus transfemoral access. In patients with postprocedural stroke, symptoms and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score were recorded. Pertinent laboratory values and procedural data was reviewed, including COVID status, platelet count, International normalized ratio (INR), Glomerular filtration rate (GFR), vessels catheterized, amount of contrast used, and fluoroscopy time. Imaging work-up for stroke symptoms was reviewed, if available.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thousand two-hundred thirty eight diagnostic cerebral angiograms with 656 patients (53%) undergoing transradial access. Stroke symptoms after angiogram were only observed in the transradial group (5 patients; 0.4% total and 0.8% among radial access cases, respectively). Symptoms included word finding difficulty, paresthesia, or weakness. Three patients underwent cross-sectional imaging, computed tomography was negative in all three patients. Magnetic resonance imaging showed small, scattered infarcts in two patients. All symptoms resolved without additional hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our experience, using transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms was associated with a low but not negligible incidence of periprocedural strokes. Patient anatomy should be evaluated prior to selection of vascular access. Patients should be made aware of a slightly higher periprocedural stroke risk with transradial access.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interventional Neuroradiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11569464/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interventional Neuroradiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199221142653\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/11/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199221142653","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在过去几年中,经桡动脉入路进行神经介入手术越来越受欢迎,这主要得益于介入心脏病学研究的推断数据、患者的偏好以及使用这种方法可行性的早期报告。我们的目的是评估经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路诊断性脑血管造影术患者围手术期中风的发生率:我们回顾性地查看了我们的神经介入数据库,确定了在 2019 年 5 月至 2021 年 7 月期间接受诊断性血管造影术的所有患者。患者进一步分为经桡动脉和经股动脉入路两种。对于术后中风的患者,我们记录了其症状和美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分。对相关实验室值和手术数据进行审查,包括 COVID 状态、血小板计数、国际标准化比值 (INR)、肾小球滤过率 (GFR)、导管血管、造影剂用量和透视时间。如果有中风症状的影像学检查结果,则对其进行复查:结果:共为 656 名患者(53%)进行了 2238 次诊断性脑血管造影,其中 656 人接受了经桡动脉入路。只有经桡动脉组患者在血管造影后出现中风症状(5 名患者;分别占总人数的 0.4% 和桡动脉入路病例的 0.8%)。症状包括找词困难、麻痹或无力。三名患者接受了横断面成像检查,计算机断层扫描检查结果均为阴性。磁共振成像显示,两名患者有小的分散性梗死。所有症状均已缓解,无需再住院治疗:根据我们的经验,使用经桡动脉入路进行诊断性脑血管造影与围手术期脑卒中的发生率较低有关,但也不容忽视。在选择血管通路之前,应对患者的解剖结构进行评估。应告知患者经桡动脉入路的围手术期中风风险略高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rate of periprocedural stroke in diagnostic cerebral angiograms comparing transradial versus transfemoral access.

Purpose: Transradial access for neurointerventional procedures has increased in popularity over the past few years due to data from extrapolated interventional cardiology studies, patient preference, and early reports of feasibility using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate the incidence of periprocedural stroke in patients undergoing transradial versus transfemoral access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our neurointerventional database and identified all patients who underwent a diagnostic angiogram between May 2019 and July 2021. Patients were further divided into transradial versus transfemoral access. In patients with postprocedural stroke, symptoms and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score were recorded. Pertinent laboratory values and procedural data was reviewed, including COVID status, platelet count, International normalized ratio (INR), Glomerular filtration rate (GFR), vessels catheterized, amount of contrast used, and fluoroscopy time. Imaging work-up for stroke symptoms was reviewed, if available.

Results: Thousand two-hundred thirty eight diagnostic cerebral angiograms with 656 patients (53%) undergoing transradial access. Stroke symptoms after angiogram were only observed in the transradial group (5 patients; 0.4% total and 0.8% among radial access cases, respectively). Symptoms included word finding difficulty, paresthesia, or weakness. Three patients underwent cross-sectional imaging, computed tomography was negative in all three patients. Magnetic resonance imaging showed small, scattered infarcts in two patients. All symptoms resolved without additional hospitalization.

Conclusion: In our experience, using transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiograms was associated with a low but not negligible incidence of periprocedural strokes. Patient anatomy should be evaluated prior to selection of vascular access. Patients should be made aware of a slightly higher periprocedural stroke risk with transradial access.

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
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
11.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is a peer-reviewed clinical practice journal documenting the current state of interventional neuroradiology worldwide. INR publishes original clinical observations, descriptions of new techniques or procedures, case reports, and articles on the ethical and social aspects of related health care. Original research published in INR is related to the practice of interventional neuroradiology...
×
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