论文部分内容阅读
目的对经桡动脉与股动脉入径介入治疗冠心病的临床可行性、安全性及疗效进行对比研究。方法568例患者分别经桡动脉(264例,A组)或经股动脉(304例,B组)入径接受选择性冠状动脉造影或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,观察两组手术成功率和术后并发症情况。结果两组患者的手术成功率差异无显著性。A组局部血肿发生率显著低于B组,无假性动脉瘤(B组7例,p<0.05)等其他血管及皮肤并发症,1例发生术侧肢体浮肿;B组出现1例动静脉瘘、2例术侧肢体浮肿、5例穿刺部位表皮坏死,但两组相比差异无显著性。两组均无远端肢体缺血。结论经挠动脉入径行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗术后并发症少,可行性高,安全有效。
Objective To compare the clinical feasibility, safety and efficacy of interventional therapy of coronary artery disease via radial artery and femoral artery. Methods 568 patients were treated with selective coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention through the radial artery (264 cases, group A) or the femoral artery (304 cases, group B), respectively. The success rate and operation Postoperative complications. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in the success rate of surgery. A group of local hematoma incidence was significantly lower than the B group, no pseudoaneurysm (B group 7 cases, p <0.05) and other other vascular and skin complications, 1 case of limb edema; B group appeared in 1 case of arteriovenous Fistula, 2 cases of extremity edema, 5 cases of epidermal necrosis at the puncture site, but no significant difference between the two groups. No distal limb ischemia was seen in either group. Conclusions Percutaneous coronary intervention after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty has fewer complications and is feasible, safe and effective.