论文部分内容阅读
目的比较经桡动脉和股动脉途径行冠状动脉造影的优缺点。方法本院自2000年1月至2008年12月行冠状动脉造影患者506例,按股动脉途径或桡动脉途径分为两组,比较手术操作时间、加压包扎时间、成功率、并发症发生率等,并进行统计学分析。结果手术操作时间分别为(11.2±3.4)min和(10.8±3.6)min;加压包扎时间分别为(2.52±1.28)min和(20.34±6.11)min,穿刺成功率分别为97.9%和100%,并发症发生率分别1.2%和10.8%。结论经桡动脉途径冠状动脉介入诊疗具有止血方便、血管并发症少、无体位限制、患者痛苦小,特别对于心功能不全、支架术后复查患者是一种理想的冠状动脉造影途径。
Objective To compare the advantages and disadvantages of coronary angiography via radial artery and femoral artery. Methods From January 2000 to December 2008, 506 patients undergoing coronary angiography were divided into two groups according to femoral artery approach or radial artery approach. The operation time, pressure dressing time, success rate and complications Rate, etc., and statistical analysis. Results The operative time was (11.2 ± 3.4) min and (10.8 ± 3.6) min, respectively. The time of compression banding was (2.52 ± 1.28) min and (20.34 ± 6.11) min, respectively. The successful rates of puncture were 97.9% and 100% The incidence of complications were 1.2% and 10.8% respectively. Conclusion The transradial coronary intervention has the advantages of convenient hemostasis, less vascular complications and no restriction of position. It is a little painful for patients with cardiac insufficiency, especially for patients with cardiac insufficiency after coronary stenting. It is an ideal method of coronary angiography.