| 冠脉介入术后3种止血方法的比较 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 杨红梅,王庆胜,柳东田,卞秋武,王晓亮. 冠脉介入术后3种止血方法的比较[J]. 心脏杂志, 2007, 19(3): 339-341. DOI: 10.13191/j.chj.2007.03.97.yanghm.031 |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 杨红梅 王庆胜 柳东田 卞秋武 王晓亮 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 秦皇岛市第一医院心内科,河北,秦皇岛,066000 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目的评价血管缝合器（Perclose和Angioseal）在冠状动脉造影（CAG）或经皮冠状动脉内介入术（PCI）后股动脉止血的临床应用价值。方法选择2004年12月至2005年12月在我院行CAG或PCI术的患者180例,分为A、B、C3组,每组60例。A组使用Perclose封闭股动脉穿刺点,B组使用Angioseal封闭股动脉穿刺点,C组使用常规人工压迫方法止血。观察止血时间、制动时间、及术后并发症的发生情况。结果使用Perclose和Angioseal的止血时间和下肢制动时间均较手法压迫止血显著缩短（均P<0.01）,其中使用Angioseal的止血时间还要略少于使用Perclose的止血时间,且操作更简单,但二者在止血时间和制动时间方面无统计学差异。3组在术后并发症方面无统计学差异。结论Perclose和Angioseal较常规压迫止血显著缩短止血时间和患者卧床时间。
|
| 关 键 词： | 血管缝合器 Perclose Angioseal 冠状动脉造影 经皮冠状动脉内介入术 |
| 文章编号： | 1009-7236（2007）03-339-03 |
| 收稿时间： | 2006-03-16 |
| 修稿时间： | 2006-03-162006-04-25 |
Comparison of three hemostasis methods after percutaneous coronary intervention |
| |
| YANG Hong-mei,WANG Qing-sheng,LIU Dong-tian,BIAN Qiu-wu,WANG Xiao-liang. Comparison of three hemostasis methods after percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. Chinese Heart Journal, 2007, 19(3): 339-341. DOI: 10.13191/j.chj.2007.03.97.yanghm.031 |
| |
| Authors: | YANG Hong-mei WANG Qing-sheng LIU Dong-tian BIAN Qiu-wu WANG Xiao-liang |
| |
| Affiliation: | Department of Cardiology, First Hospital, City of Qinhuangdao, Qinhuangdao 066000, Hebei, China |
| |
| Abstract: | AIM To evaluate clinical value of vessel suture devices -Perclose and Angioseal-to hemostasis after coronary arteriongraphy (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS One hundred and eighty patients who underwent CAG or PCI from December 2004 to December 2005 were included in the study, of whom, 60 patients were treated with Perclose, 60 with Angioseal and 60 with artificial compression of hemostasis. The hemostasia time, immobilization time and postoperative complications of the three groups were compared. RESULTS Hemostasia time and lower limb immobilization time of hemostasis for patients treated with Perclose and Angioseal were significantly decreased compared with those treated with artificial compression (P<0.01). There was no obvious difference in the hemostasia time, immobilization time and postoperative complications between the Perclose group and Angioseal group, but the hemostasia time in Angioseal group was shorter than that in Perclose group. CONCLUSION Perclose and Angioseal significantly decrease the hemostasia time and lower limb immobilization time of hemostasis compared with artificial compression. |
| |
| Keywords: | Perclose Angioseal |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《心脏杂志》浏览原始摘要信息 |
|
点击此处可从《心脏杂志》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
