...
首页> 外文期刊>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions: Official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions >Accuracy and Procedural Characteristics of Standard Needle Compared With Radiofrequency Needle Transseptal Puncture for Structural Heart Interventions
【24h】

Accuracy and Procedural Characteristics of Standard Needle Compared With Radiofrequency Needle Transseptal Puncture for Structural Heart Interventions

机译:标准针的准确性和程序特性与射频针横断面穿刺结构心脏干预措施

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objectives: Our objectives were to assess for differences between standard and radiofrequency (RF) needle in procedural times, success, and spatial accuracy Background: Targeted transseptal (TS) puncture is essential for structural heart interventions. Spatial accuracy of standard versus RF needle has not been reported. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing structural heart interventions requiring TS puncture were studied retrospectively. A standard needle was alternated with a RF needle. Procedural success and times were recorded. Measurements based on intraprocedural transesophageal echocardiograms of the intended versus final TS crossing site were obtained. Pre-puncture and maximal tenting of the septum were also recorded. Results: Twenty-five patients underwent standard needle and 27 RF TS access. All RF needle attempts to cross were successful without an assistance wire. Three standard needle patients required assisted crossing. After failed TS access, two patients had successful RF TS access. TS procedural times significantly favored the RF needle for time from septum to puncture (P=0.02). Both standard and RF access yielded accurate crossing with no significant differences between the intended and actual crossing site. Maximal tenting was significantly less with the RF needle (P=0.004). There were no major complications. Conclusions: In the hands of an experienced operator, there were no major clinically significant differences between the standard and RF needle approaches. However, procedural unassisted crossing success was higher with the RF needle approach as compared to standard needle. Procedural times and degree of septum tenting favored the RF over standard needle. Accuracy was similar with both approaches. RF was a successful strategy when standard needle failed. There were no major complications with either TS puncture strategy. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
机译:目的:我们的目标是评估标准和射频(RF)针之间的差异,在程序时代,成功和空间精度背景:靶向旋流子(TS)穿刺对于结构性心脏干预至关重要。尚未报告标准与RF针的空间精度。方法:回顾性地研究了需要TS穿刺的结构心脏干预的连续患者。标准针与RF针交替。记录程序成功和时间。获得了基于预期与最终TS交叉部位的颅内经牙龈超声心动图的测量。还记录了隔膜的预刺破和最大塔。结果:二十五名患者经过标准针和27射频TS接入。没有援助线,所有射频针都会成功。三个标准针患者需要辅助交叉。在失败的TS访问后,两个患者有成功的RF TS访问。 TS程序时间明显地利用从隔膜到穿刺的时间(p = 0.02)。标准和RF接入均可在预期和实际交叉部位之间没有显着差异。 RF针的最大避免显着较大(P = 0.004)。没有主要的并发症。结论:在经验丰富的运营商的手中,标准和RF针接近没有主要的临床显着差异。然而,与标准针相比,射频针对射频横穿成功的程序性横向成功较高。子宫内容的过程时间和程度偏爱标准针头的RF。两种方法都很类似。标准针头失败时,RF是一个成功的策略。 TS穿刺策略没有主要的并发症。 (c)2016 Wiley期刊,Inc。

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