论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨在西宁地区经桡动脉与股动脉对急性心肌梗死(acute myocardial infarction,AMI)患者行急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(percutaneous coronary lntervention,PCI)的可行性和安全性对比。方法:选择2011年1月—2013年11月我院收治的发病在6小时以内的AMI患者102例,随机分为右侧桡动脉组(46例)和右侧股动脉组(56例),两组比较急诊PCI各操作时间、包括导管到位时间、手术成功率、术后1个月不良心血管事件(MACE)发生率及各种并发症。结果:右侧桡动脉组导管到位时间、手术成功率、术后1个月不良心血管事件发生率与右侧股动脉组相比均无明显差异。血管相关并发症的发生与右侧股动脉组相比较少。结论:与右侧股动脉途径相比,经右侧桡动脉途径行急诊PCI治疗不增加操作时间。且并发症少、创伤小,可避免股动脉途径的一些致命并发症,患者依从性高,是一种安全、有效的方法,值得临床推广。
Objective: To investigate the feasibility and safety of transradial and femoral arteries in treating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Xining area. Methods: A total of 102 AMI patients admitted to our hospital from January 2011 to November 2013 within 6 hours were randomly divided into right radial artery group (46 cases) and right femoral artery group (56 cases) The two groups compared the operation time of emergency PCI, including the time of catheterization, the success rate of operation, the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and various complications one month after operation. Results: There were no significant differences in the time of catheterization, the success rate of operation, the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events one month after operation in the right radial artery group compared with the right femoral artery group. Vascular-related complications occurred less frequently in the right femoral artery group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the right femoral artery approach, an emergency PCI approach via the right radial artery approach does not increase the operating time. And less complications, less trauma, to avoid some of the fatal complications of the femoral artery approach, patients with high compliance, is a safe and effective method, worthy of clinical promotion.