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

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Angiology Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-15 DOI:10.1177/00033197231163358
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。
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 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.

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
Angiology
Angiology 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
180
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
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
×
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