...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American College of Cardiology >Bleeding avoidance strategies consensus and controversy.
【24h】

Bleeding avoidance strategies consensus and controversy.

机译:避免出血策略达成共识并引起争议。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Bleeding complications after coronary intervention are associated with prolonged hospitalization, increased hospital costs, patient dissatisfaction, morbidity, and 1-year mortality. Bleeding avoidance strategies is a term incorporating multiple modalities that aim to reduce bleeding and vascular complications after cardiovascular catheterization. Recent improvements in the rates of bleeding complications after invasive cardiovascular procedures suggest that the clinical community has successfully embraced specific strategies and improved patient care in this area. There remains controversy regarding the efficacy, safety, and/or practicality of 3 key bleeding avoidance strategies for cardiac catheterization and coronary intervention: procedural (radial artery approach, safezone arteriotomy), pharmacological (multiple agents), and technological (vascular closure devices) approaches to improved access. In this paper, we address areas of consensus with respect to selected modalities in order to define the role of each strategy in current practice. Furthermore, we focus on areas of controversy for selected modalities in order to define key areas warranting cautious clinical approaches and the need for future randomized clinical trials in this area.
机译:冠状动脉介入治疗后出血并发症与住院时间延长,住院费用增加,患者不满意,发病率和1年死亡率有关。避免出血策略是一个包含多种方式的术语,旨在减少心血管导管插入术后的出血和血管并发症。侵入性心血管手术后出血并发症发生率的最新改善表明,临床社区已成功采用了特定策略并改善了该领域的患者护理。关于用于心脏导管插入术和冠状动脉介入治疗的三种主要的避免出血策略的功效,安全性和/或实用性仍存在争议:程序性((动脉入路,安全区动脉切开术),药理性(多种药物)和技术性(血管闭合装置)方法改善访问。在本文中,我们将就选定的模式达成共识,以定义每种策略在当前实践中的作用。此外,我们将重点放在选定模式的争议领域,以定义需要谨慎临床方法使用的关键领域,以及对该领域未来进行随机临床试验的需求。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号