Shang-Xiong Chen, Bin Zhang, Ying-Xue Hao, Hang Xiao
{"title":"经桡动脉远端入路与股动脉入路在非冠状动脉疾病血管内治疗中的比较","authors":"Shang-Xiong Chen, Bin Zhang, Ying-Xue Hao, Hang Xiao","doi":"10.1177/00033197231163358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study compared the efficacy and safety of distal transradial access (dTRA) and common femoral artery access (CFA) for endovascular treatment of non-coronary arterial disease. 102 interventions were divided into dTRA (<i>n</i> = 51) and CFA (<i>n</i> = 51) groups; the puncture success rate was 100% in both groups. The mean number of punctures and puncture time were greater in the dTRA than CFA group (1.86 vs 1.04 and 3.96 vs ≤1.00 min, <i>p</i> < .001 for both), whereas the access-related complication rate was comparable. The surgical success rate was higher in the CFA than dTRA group (98.0 vs 84.3, <i>p</i> = .036), and the operative time was longer in the dTRA than CFA group (99.09 vs 84.10 min, <i>p</i> = .017). The postoperative adverse event rate was not different between the dTRA and CFA groups. dTRA is a safe and feasible access for non-coronary arterial disease and is comparable to CFA in terms of puncture success, access-related complications, and major adverse events. The dTRA is inferior to CFA in the treatment of lower extremity arterial disease. Due to the increase in the operation time and the contrast medium volume in the dTRA, it is necessary to be vigilant about contrast nephropathy and late radiological random side effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":8264,"journal":{"name":"Angiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Distal Transradial and Femoral Access in Endovascular Treatment of Non-coronary Arterial Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Shang-Xiong Chen, Bin Zhang, Ying-Xue Hao, Hang Xiao\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00033197231163358\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study compared the efficacy and safety of distal transradial access (dTRA) and common femoral artery access (CFA) for endovascular treatment of non-coronary arterial disease. 102 interventions were divided into dTRA (<i>n</i> = 51) and CFA (<i>n</i> = 51) groups; the puncture success rate was 100% in both groups. The mean number of punctures and puncture time were greater in the dTRA than CFA group (1.86 vs 1.04 and 3.96 vs ≤1.00 min, <i>p</i> < .001 for both), whereas the access-related complication rate was comparable. The surgical success rate was higher in the CFA than dTRA group (98.0 vs 84.3, <i>p</i> = .036), and the operative time was longer in the dTRA than CFA group (99.09 vs 84.10 min, <i>p</i> = .017). The postoperative adverse event rate was not different between the dTRA and CFA groups. dTRA is a safe and feasible access for non-coronary arterial disease and is comparable to CFA in terms of puncture success, access-related complications, and major adverse events. The dTRA is inferior to CFA in the treatment of lower extremity arterial disease. Due to the increase in the operation time and the contrast medium volume in the dTRA, it is necessary to be vigilant about contrast nephropathy and late radiological random side effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Angiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Angiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00033197231163358\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Angiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00033197231163358","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这项研究比较了经桡动脉远端入路(dTRA)和股总动脉入路(CFA)用于非冠状动脉疾病血管内治疗的有效性和安全性。102 例介入治疗分为 dTRA 组(51 例)和 CFA 组(51 例);两组的穿刺成功率均为 100%。dTRA组的平均穿刺次数和穿刺时间均多于CFA组(1.86次对1.04次,3.96分钟对≤1.00分钟,P<.001),而与介入相关的并发症发生率相当。CFA组的手术成功率高于dTRA组(98.0 vs 84.3,p = .036),dTRA组的手术时间长于CFA组(99.09 vs 84.10分钟,p = .017)。dTRA 是一种安全可行的非冠状动脉疾病入路,在穿刺成功率、入路相关并发症和主要不良事件方面与 CFA 相当。在治疗下肢动脉疾病方面,dTRA不如CFA。由于 dTRA 的手术时间和造影剂用量增加,必须警惕造影剂肾病和晚期放射学随机副作用。
Comparison of Distal Transradial and Femoral Access in Endovascular Treatment of Non-coronary Arterial Disease.
This study compared the efficacy and safety of distal transradial access (dTRA) and common femoral artery access (CFA) for endovascular treatment of non-coronary arterial disease. 102 interventions were divided into dTRA (n = 51) and CFA (n = 51) groups; the puncture success rate was 100% in both groups. The mean number of punctures and puncture time were greater in the dTRA than CFA group (1.86 vs 1.04 and 3.96 vs ≤1.00 min, p < .001 for both), whereas the access-related complication rate was comparable. The surgical success rate was higher in the CFA than dTRA group (98.0 vs 84.3, p = .036), and the operative time was longer in the dTRA than CFA group (99.09 vs 84.10 min, p = .017). The postoperative adverse event rate was not different between the dTRA and CFA groups. dTRA is a safe and feasible access for non-coronary arterial disease and is comparable to CFA in terms of puncture success, access-related complications, and major adverse events. The dTRA is inferior to CFA in the treatment of lower extremity arterial disease. Due to the increase in the operation time and the contrast medium volume in the dTRA, it is necessary to be vigilant about contrast nephropathy and late radiological random side effects.
期刊介绍:
A presentation of original, peer-reviewed original articles, review and case reports relative to all phases of all vascular diseases, Angiology (ANG) offers more than a typical cardiology journal. With approximately 1000 pages per year covering diagnostic methods, therapeutic approaches, and clinical and laboratory research, ANG is among the most informative publications in the field of peripheral vascular and cardiovascular diseases. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 13 days