R. R. Barbosa, F. Cesar, Renato Giestas Serpa, Vinícius Fraga Mauro, J. Edson Ferreira Jr., Denis Moulin dos Reis Bayerl, Walkimar Ururay Gloria Veloso, R. Cesar, Pedro Abílio Ribeiro Reseck
{"title":"桡动脉和股动脉导管透视时间比较","authors":"R. R. Barbosa, F. Cesar, Renato Giestas Serpa, Vinícius Fraga Mauro, J. Edson Ferreira Jr., Denis Moulin dos Reis Bayerl, Walkimar Ururay Gloria Veloso, R. Cesar, Pedro Abílio Ribeiro Reseck","doi":"10.1590/0104-1843000000057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The use of radial access in cardiac interventions is associated with reduced vascular complications, however it demands a longer learning curve and may increase fluoroscopy time. This study aimed to evaluate the fluoroscopy time as a surrogate marker of radiation exposure, during diagnostic cardiac catheterization by radial and femoral routes. Methods: Retrospective observational study including patients who underwent cardiac catheterization from July 2013 to October 2014. Radial and femoral groups were compared for total procedural time, fluoroscopy time, fluoroscopy to procedural time ratio and vascular complications. Results: The study included 1,915 procedures, 11.2% of which performed by radial approach and 88.8%, by femoral approach. A male prevalence was found in the radial group (80% vs. 54.1%, p < 0.01), but age (61.6 ± 9.7 years vs. 62.4 ± 11.6 years, p = 0.13), total procedural time (8.7 ± 3.8 vs. 8.1 ± 4.1 minutes, p = 0.91), fluoroscopy time (4.8 ± 2.7 vs. 4.1 ± 2.6 minutes, p = 0.89), fluoroscopy/procedure time ratio (0.56 ± 0.24 vs. 0.49 ± 0.32, p = 0.89), and major complications (0.0% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.55) were similar between groups. Conclusions: The use of the transradial approach for diagnostic procedures by experienced operating physicians may be used with an acceptable total procedural time without increasing the radiation exposure of the patient and staff, and with a low incidence of complications.","PeriodicalId":101093,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva","volume":"50 1","pages":"343-348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparação do Tempo de Fluoroscopia Durante Cateterismo Cardíaco pelas Vias Radial e Femoral\",\"authors\":\"R. R. Barbosa, F. Cesar, Renato Giestas Serpa, Vinícius Fraga Mauro, J. Edson Ferreira Jr., Denis Moulin dos Reis Bayerl, Walkimar Ururay Gloria Veloso, R. Cesar, Pedro Abílio Ribeiro Reseck\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/0104-1843000000057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The use of radial access in cardiac interventions is associated with reduced vascular complications, however it demands a longer learning curve and may increase fluoroscopy time. This study aimed to evaluate the fluoroscopy time as a surrogate marker of radiation exposure, during diagnostic cardiac catheterization by radial and femoral routes. Methods: Retrospective observational study including patients who underwent cardiac catheterization from July 2013 to October 2014. Radial and femoral groups were compared for total procedural time, fluoroscopy time, fluoroscopy to procedural time ratio and vascular complications. Results: The study included 1,915 procedures, 11.2% of which performed by radial approach and 88.8%, by femoral approach. A male prevalence was found in the radial group (80% vs. 54.1%, p < 0.01), but age (61.6 ± 9.7 years vs. 62.4 ± 11.6 years, p = 0.13), total procedural time (8.7 ± 3.8 vs. 8.1 ± 4.1 minutes, p = 0.91), fluoroscopy time (4.8 ± 2.7 vs. 4.1 ± 2.6 minutes, p = 0.89), fluoroscopy/procedure time ratio (0.56 ± 0.24 vs. 0.49 ± 0.32, p = 0.89), and major complications (0.0% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.55) were similar between groups. Conclusions: The use of the transradial approach for diagnostic procedures by experienced operating physicians may be used with an acceptable total procedural time without increasing the radiation exposure of the patient and staff, and with a low incidence of complications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":101093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"343-348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1843000000057\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1843000000057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparação do Tempo de Fluoroscopia Durante Cateterismo Cardíaco pelas Vias Radial e Femoral
Background: The use of radial access in cardiac interventions is associated with reduced vascular complications, however it demands a longer learning curve and may increase fluoroscopy time. This study aimed to evaluate the fluoroscopy time as a surrogate marker of radiation exposure, during diagnostic cardiac catheterization by radial and femoral routes. Methods: Retrospective observational study including patients who underwent cardiac catheterization from July 2013 to October 2014. Radial and femoral groups were compared for total procedural time, fluoroscopy time, fluoroscopy to procedural time ratio and vascular complications. Results: The study included 1,915 procedures, 11.2% of which performed by radial approach and 88.8%, by femoral approach. A male prevalence was found in the radial group (80% vs. 54.1%, p < 0.01), but age (61.6 ± 9.7 years vs. 62.4 ± 11.6 years, p = 0.13), total procedural time (8.7 ± 3.8 vs. 8.1 ± 4.1 minutes, p = 0.91), fluoroscopy time (4.8 ± 2.7 vs. 4.1 ± 2.6 minutes, p = 0.89), fluoroscopy/procedure time ratio (0.56 ± 0.24 vs. 0.49 ± 0.32, p = 0.89), and major complications (0.0% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.55) were similar between groups. Conclusions: The use of the transradial approach for diagnostic procedures by experienced operating physicians may be used with an acceptable total procedural time without increasing the radiation exposure of the patient and staff, and with a low incidence of complications.