目的 探讨经桡动脉路径行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的优越性.方法 回顾分析经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的423 例冠心病患者资料,其中经桡动脉路径组213 例(观察组),经股动脉路径组210 例(对照组),比较两组间首次穿刺置管成功率、手术成功率、平均住院天数及术后并发症的发生率.结果 观察组与对照组首次穿刺置管成功率(96.8% vs 98.7%)、手术成功率(98.2% vs 99.0%)比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);平均住院天数[(6.12±0.67) d vs (9.02±0.81) d]、局部血肿(2/12)、尿潴留(0/18)、失眠(2/20)、烦躁(3/14)及并发症的总发生率(5.6%vs 37.1%)比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论 经桡动脉路径行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗安全可行,可以作为首选路径.%Objective To investigate the advantages of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) via transradial artery. Methods The clinical data of 423 patients of coronary artery disease who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention was analyzed retrospectively, of which 213 were treated with PCI via transradial artery (the study group) and 210 received PCI via transfemoral artery (the control group). The rate of one-time successful catheteriza-tion, the successful rate of PCI, the mean length of hospital stay and the incidence of postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistically significant difference between the study group and the control group in the rate of one-time successful catheterization (96.8% vs 98.7%) and the successful rate of PCI (98.2% vs 99.0%), P>0.05. Statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in the mean length of hospital stay [(6.12±0.67) vs (9.02±0.81)], the incidence of local hematoma (2 vs 12), urinary retention (0 vs 18), insomnia (2 vs 20), irritability (3 vs 14), the total incidence of postoperative complications (5.6% vs 37.1%), P<0.05. Conclusion Percutaneous coronary intervention via transradial artery was safe and feasible, which should be the first choice for treating coronary artery disease.
展开▼
