经桡动脉4F导管行冠状动脉造影的可行性与安全性研究

目的评价4F造影导管经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影的可行性与安全性。方法入选2008年5月至2009年5月于安贞医院就诊初次行冠状动脉造影的患者947例,使用随机数字表随机分为4F导管组和5F导管组。比较两组间造影成功率、造影图像质量、手术时间、对比剂用量、压迫止血时间、单导管完成率、导管打结率、桡动脉痉挛发生率以及术中和术后不良心血管事件,分别于术前24h,术后24h,术后4周行右桡动脉彩色多普勒超声。结果 4F导管组和5F导管组在造影成功率、造影图像质量、手术时间、对比剂用量、单导管完成率、导管打结率、桡动脉痉挛发生率等方面差异均无统计学意义,压迫止血时间4F组显著短于5F组(4.62±0.98)h比(6.36±0.93)h,P<0.001。除5F组一例患者于术中出现心室颤动外,两组患者均未出现院内、院外死亡、急性血栓事件、严重出血事件、前臂大血肿等;4F组桡动脉闭塞、桡动脉内膜增厚率均显著少于5F组(分别为0.60%比2.30%,P=0.038;1.10%比4.10%,P=0.003)。结论 4F造影导管经桡动脉行冠状动脉造影术安全、可行,同时对桡动脉损伤小,血管并发症少,术后压迫止血时间短,舒适度更高。     

5F共用型造影导管在经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影中的应用

目的　探讨 5 F共用型造影导管在经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影中的应用价值。方法　选择经桡动脉径路行冠状动脉及左心室造影患者 89例 ,按其造影时首选 5 F Judkins型造影导管或 5 F共用型造影导管 ,分为Judkins型组 (n=4 8)和共用型组 (n=4 1)。对比两组手术成功率、X线透视时间和手术操作时间。结果　共用型组中 39例 (95 .1% )经桡动脉径路行冠状动脉及左心室造影成功 ,Judkins型组中 4 4例 (91.7% )造影成功 ,共用型组的造影成功率明显高于 Judkins型组 (P <0 .0 1)。Judkins型组的冠状动脉及左心室造影平均 X线透视时间和手术操作时间分别为 (7.5± 5 .5 )和 (30 .8± 2 0 .1)分钟 ;共用型组分别为 (5 .4± 3.4 )和 (2 4 .2± 10 .4 )分钟 ,均少于Judkins型组 (P <0 .0 1)。结论　使用较小直径造影导管经桡动脉径路施行诊断性冠状动脉造影 ,术后不需严格卧床 ,患者损伤小 ,止血方便 ,血管并发症少 ,可作为某些经选择病例的首选径路。合理选择适于桡动脉径路的造影导管 ,对提高手术操作的便捷性、安全性 ,以及保证造影质量至关重要     

使用5F造影导管经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影689例体会

目的 :探讨常规使用较小直径 ( 5F)造影导管经桡动脉径路诊断性冠状动脉造影的可行性。　　方法 :选择经桡动脉径路冠状动脉及左心室造影患者 6 89例 ,按其造影时首先选用 5FJudkins型造影导管抑或 5F共用型造影导管分为Judkins型导管组 (n =36 3)和共用型导管组 (n =32 6 )。对比观察两组手术成功率、X线透视时间和手术操作时间。　　结果 :共用型导管组 32 6例中 32 1例 ( 98 5% )经桡动脉径路行冠状动脉及左心室造影成功 ,Judkins型导管组 36 3例中 343例 ( 94 5% )经绕动脉径路行冠状动脉造影及左心室造影成功 ,共用型导管组的造影成功率明显高于Judkins型导管组 ,有极显著性差异 (P <0 0 1 )。Judkins型导管组的冠状动脉及左心室造影平均X线透视时间和手术操作时间分别为 7 5± 5 5分和 30 8± 2 0 1分 ,而共用型导管组的冠状动脉及左心室造影平均X线透视时间和手术操作时间分别为 5 4± 3 4分和 2 4 2± 1 0 4分 ,均少于Judkins型导管组 ,有极显著性差异 (P <0 0 1 )。　　结论 :①使用较小直径造影导管经桡动脉径路施行诊断性冠状动脉造影术后不需严格卧床 ,患者损伤小 ,止血方便 ,血管并发症少 ,可作为某些经选择病例的首选径路。②合理选择适于桡动脉径路的造影导管对提高手术操作的便     

经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗中5F与6F导引导管的对比研究

目的比较5French(5F)及6French(6F)导引导管在经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗(TRI)患者中的安全性及有效性。方法共纳入2009年2月至2010年3月患者,收集相关资料录入数据库,包括患者基线临床资料、导引导管的尺寸、靶血管、靶病变的特点、手术的成功率、手术失败原因、经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗手术的成功率及失败原因、患者住院期间主要不良心血管事件率及术后桡动脉闭塞率。结果连续纳入患者共185例,接受195次经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗术,平均年龄(57±11)岁(33～81岁);其中54例患者纳入6F导引导管组,共进行56次手术,治疗89处病变;138例患者纳入5F导引导管组,共行146次手术,治疗231处病变。AHA B2/C型病变比例在两组间差异无统计学意义(5F组43.7%/29.0%比6F组46.1%/34.6%,P>0.05),但慢性闭塞性病变、分叉病变、钙化病变5F组显著少于6F组(5.6%比14.6%,P=0.005;23.4%比37.1%,P=0.012;9.5%比47.2%,P<0.001);组间的手术时间[(45±21)min比(46±19)min)]、手术X线曝光时间[(15±12)min比(16±13)min]、使用造影剂量[(140±45)ml比(156±56)ml]差异均无显著统计学意义(P>0.05),但是5F组造影剂用量有减少的趋势(P=0.066);组间住院时间[(1.40±1.26)d比(1.29±0.69)d]和手术成功率(95.2%比94.6%)也差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);5F组1例患者术后桡动脉闭塞,6F组无患者术后桡动脉闭塞(P=1.0),5F组1例发生卒中。结论经桡动脉冠状动脉介入治疗,即使是复杂及高危冠脉病变,5F导引导管有效、安全,手术成功率不低于常规使用的6F导引导管;换用5F导引导管进行冠状动脉介入治疗是一种有吸引力的选择。     

经左桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影检查的可行性研究

目的:与右桡动脉径路对比,探讨经左桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影检查的可行性及安全性。方法:共选择2007-10至2010-03我院住院行诊断性冠状动脉造影的连续性患者908例,分成左桡动脉组(456例)和右桡动脉组(452例),所有患者均符合Allen试验阳性(桡动脉与尺动脉之间存在良好的侧支循环),使用5F或6F桡动脉专用穿刺鞘组穿刺桡动脉,使用5F左右共用型冠状动脉造影导管(TIG造影管)或Judkins型造影导管行冠状动脉造影检查,对比两组造影完成率、导丝导管交换率、X线曝光量、血管并发症和患者接受度。结果:两组908例患者行左、右桡动脉原位穿刺成功率均为99.3%。与右桡动脉组比较,左桡动脉组超滑导丝更换率、X线曝光时间降低(P0.001),而主要表现在X线曝光时间3 min的患者比率左桡动脉组显著高于右桡动脉组(P0.001),X线曝光时间6 min的患者比率左桡动脉组显著低于右桡动脉组(P0.001),差异均有统计学意义。结论:经左桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影检查是安全可行的,值得临床选择性应用。     

新型大腔4F造影导管与5F桡动脉鞘导管在经桡动脉途径冠状动脉造影中的应用效果比较

目的比较新型大腔4F造影导管与5F桡动脉鞘导管在经桡动脉途径冠状动脉造影中的应用效果。方法选取2016年桂林市妇女儿童医院心血管内科收治的拟行冠状动脉造影患者427例,采用随机数字表法分为4F组214例和5F组213例。4F组患者采用新型大腔4F造影导管进行经桡动脉途径冠状动脉造影,而5F组患者采用5F桡动脉鞘导管进行经桡动脉途径冠状动脉造影。比较两组患者造影成功率、导管打结率、手术时间、压迫止血时间、对比剂用量、图像质量评分及并发症发生情况。结果两组患者造影成功率、导管打结率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者手术时间、对比剂用量、图像质量评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05),而4F组患者压迫止血时间短于5F组(P0.05)。4F组患者并发症发生率低于5F组(P0.05)。结论新型大腔4F造影导管与5F桡动脉鞘导管在经桡动脉途径冠状动脉造影中的应用效果相当,但新型大腔4F造影导管可有效缩短压迫止血时间,减少并发症的发生,安全性较高。     

不同类型5F共用型造影导管在经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影中的应用

目的　探讨使用较小直径 (5F)共用型造影导管经桡动脉径路行诊断性冠状动脉造影的可行性。方法　选择 2 0 0 1年 5月至 2 0 0 4年 4月间在阜外医院行择期经桡动脉径路冠状动脉及左心室造影患者 30 94例 ,其中男性 2 396例 ,女性 6 98例 ,平均年龄 5 6 1± 9 8(30～ 81)岁。入选患者按其造影时首先选用可供左、右冠状动脉插管的 5F共用型造影导管分为共用型导管Ⅰ组 (Mitsudo型 ,日本Hanako公司产品 ,n =985 )、共用型导管Ⅱ组 (Terumo型 ,日本Terumo公司产品 ,n =10 2 4 )和共用型导管Ⅲ组 (Medtronic型 ,美国Medtronic公司产品 ,n =10 85 )。比较上述三组间手术成功率、冠状动脉及左心室造影平均手术操作时间和X光透视时间。结果　 (1)共用型导管Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组经桡动脉径路行冠状动脉及左心室造影成功率分别为 98 4 %、98 0 %和 96 0 % ,Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组间差异无统计学意义 ,但高于Ⅲ组 (P <0 0 5 )。 (2 )共用型导管Ⅰ组的冠状动脉及左室造影平均手术操作时间和X光透视时间分别为 (17 9± 5 8)min和 (4 8± 1 8)min ,共用型导管Ⅱ组为 (18 2± 5 5 )min和(5 0± 1 7)min ,而Ⅲ组为 (2 1 1± 7 2 )min和 (5 2± 1 9)min ,均明显长于前两组 (P <0 0 5 )。结论(1)使用较小直径的共用型造影导管经桡     

经桡动脉途径开展门诊冠状动脉造影的可行性与安全性

目的 评价门诊经桡动脉途径开展冠状动脉造影的可行性与安全性.方法 选择2007年2月至6月在首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院门诊就诊的患者100例作为试验组,另选取同期住院接受冠状动脉造影检查的患者100例作为对照组.主要观察指标包括:造影成功率、不同直径造影导管使用率、术中不良事件(包括死亡,恶性心律失常,急性心肌梗死,冠状动脉痉挛、夹层、穿孔和闭塞)及术后不良事件(包括死亡,急性心肌梗死,患侧上肢血肿、假性动脉瘤、骨筋膜室综合征和桡动脉闭塞)等.结果 门诊经桡动脉冠状动脉造影的成功率为100%.与对照组比较,试验组造影时间[(12.5±3.4)min比(10.8±3.6)min,P=0.517]及X线透视时间[(4.3±1.0)min比(4.1±1.0)min,P=0.629]差异无统计学意义.两组术中均观察到桡动脉痉挛和冠状动脉痉挛,术后均观察到血肿,两组的差异均无统计学意义,无其他不良事件.试验组总医疗费用较对照组显著降低[(4m2±238)元比(5329±371)元,P<0.001],节省的费用主要包括造影前后的检查费用、药物治疗费、床位费、护理费及其他费用.结论 在病情相对平稳的患者中开展门诊经桡动脉冠状动脉造影检查安全、可行,同时能够大幅节省医疗费用,缩短住院时间.     

经皮桡动脉冠状动脉造影及冠状动脉成形术的临床应用

目的 :评价经皮桡动脉冠状动脉造影术与冠状动脉腔内成形术 (PTCA)的临床应用价值。方法 :有选择性的对 37例患者行经皮桡动脉途径冠状动脉造影及冠状动脉成形术 ,观察其疗效和血管并发症。结果 :1 桡动脉穿刺成功率为 93 8% (有 2例失败 )。 2 14例冠状动脉造影正常 ,17例冠状动脉造影显示 2 6处存在≥ 70 %的狭窄病变 ,适合行冠状动脉介入手术。 2 6处病变有 4处PTCA疗效满意 ,2 2处行PTCA +支架术 ,植入支架 31只。狭窄从 (81± 12 ) %降低至 (10 6± 7 4 ) % ,最小血管直径由 (0 86± 0 12 )mm增加至 (3 0 8± 0 32 )mm。 6例病人行冠状动脉旁路移植术。 3 所有患者术后即拔导管鞘 ,局部压迫 4h。术后并发症的发生率为 3 3% (1例术后的桡动脉闭塞 )。结论 :经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影及冠状动脉成形术安全可行 ,其具有穿刺部位出血少、住院时间短的特点 ,可选择性的应用于某些冠心病患者。     

5F TIG多功能导管在经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影中的应用

目的探讨5F TIG多功能导管在经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影中的应用价值。方法选择经桡动脉径路行冠状动脉造影患者112例,按其造影时首选5F Judkins型造影导管或5F TIG造影导管,分为Judkins组(n=60)和TIG组(n=52)。比较两组手术操作成功率、X线透视时间和手术操作时间,观察两组血管并发症情况。结果 TIG组冠脉造影成功率不低于Judkins组(P>0.05),平均X线透视时间和手术操作时间均少于Judkins组(P<0.01),并可显著减少桡动脉痉挛等局部血管并发症。结论 5F TIG造影导管可减少导管交换次数,节省耗材使用,具有缩短操作时间、有效避免或减少血管痉挛发生的优势,可作为经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影术中器械的重要选择。     

塑型Judkins R造影导管在经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影中的应用

目的探索塑型JudkinsR导管用于经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影的有效性与可行性。方法2006年3月～2007年8月．我院行经桡动脉径路冠状动脉造影及介入治疗243例，男139例，女104例，年龄38～78岁。按使用造影导管分成3组，Terumo 5F共用型（TIG）导管组78例；通用型6F Cordis Judkins（JL3．5、JR4．0）导管组67例；6F Cordis Judkins R（JR4．0）导管组98例（包括使用塑型6F Judkins R导管75例）。比较上述各组间造影操作时间、X线曝光时间、冠状动脉造影成功率和并发症；比较单纯使用普通6F JR4．0导管与使用塑型6FJR4．0导管造影成功率。结果Terumo共用型导管组和JudkinsR导管组的平均操作时间、x线曝光时间低于通用型Judkins导管组（P〈0．05）。Judkins R导管组造影成功率低于Terumo共用型导管组和通用型Judkins导管组（P〈0．05），但是塑型Judkins R导管的造影成功率（88％）高于普通Judkins R导管（61％）（P〈0．05）。在Terumo共用型导管组和Judkins R导管组中桡动脉痉挛发生率低于通用型Judkins导管组（P〈0．05）。结论塑型Judkins R导管完成经桡动脉冠状动脉造影是没有共用型造影导管时的安全有效选择．合理的塑型是使用这种方法完成经桡动脉冠状动脉造影成功的关键。     

经桡动脉冠状动脉介入诊疗术后桡动脉损伤的影响因素分析

目的:探讨接受桡动脉冠状动脉介入诊疗患者术后,桡动脉损伤的情况及影响因素。方法:入选2008年5月至2009年10月,于安贞医院就诊拟行冠状动脉造影的患者966例,随机分为4F动脉鞘管组和6F动脉鞘管组。分析两组患者桡动脉并发症〔如桡动脉闭塞(RAO)、桡动脉痉挛(RAS)等〕的发生率,通过多因素Logistic回归分析RAO的危险因素。结果:4F鞘管组和6F鞘管组中,RAO(0.8%vs.2.9%,P=0.018),RAS(1.2%vs.3.5%,P=0.021),桡动脉内膜增厚率(1.0%vs.4.1%,P=0.002),前臂小血肿(0.6%vs.2.5%,P=0.020),患肢疼痛(1.2%vs.4.1%,P=0.006)等的发生率及压迫止血时间〔(4.62±0.98)vs.(6.36±0.93)h,P<0.001〕,4F组均低于6F组,差异有统计学意义。两组患者均未出现前臂大血肿、假性动脉瘤、动静脉瘘及骨筋膜室综合征。RAO经多因素回归分析显示,大尺径动脉鞘管、术后压迫止血时间过长是发生RAO的危险因素。结论:经桡动脉PCI中选择小直径动脉鞘管,避免术后长时间的压迫止血有利于降低RAO的发生率,同时减少桡动脉内膜损伤,提高患者舒适度。     

Effectiveness of Handmade “Jacky‐Like Catheter” As a Single Multipurpose Catheter in Transradial Coronary Angiography: A Randomized Comparison With Conventional Two‐Catheter Strategy

Objective

To investigate safety and efficacy of specialized hand‐modified “Jacky‐Like” catheter (JLC) as a single dual‐purpose catheter in transradial coronary angiography.

Methods

Patients over 18 years undergoing diagnostic CAG through right radial artery (RRA) were prospectively enrolled. Procedures were performed with a single JLC modified from a left Judkins (JL) 3.5 catheter or by using 2‐catheter approach (2C). Procedures with coronary artery bypass grafts or ventricular angiographies were excluded from the study. Three hundred and eighty‐seven transradial procedures were performed successfully. One hundred and ninety‐four procedures were performed with 2C and 193 procedures with a JLC. Inability to use intended catheters, total fluoroscopic time in minutes, the consumption of contrast medium in milliliter, development of radial artery spasm (RAS), and radial artery occlusion (RAO) were evaluated.

Results

In the 2C group, angiography was successfully performed on the RCA of 191 patients (98.9%) and on LCA in 192 patients (99.4%). In the JLC group, angiography was successfully performed on the RCA and LCA of 193 (99.4%) and 174 (89.6%) patients, respectively. Utilization of supplemental catheters was significantly greater in the JLC group (21; 10.8%) versus the 2C group (3; 1.5% P = 0.001). Mean fluoroscopy time was shorter in the JLC group (2.0 ± 2.3 min vs. 2.3 ± 1.5 min; P = 0.043). Mean procedure time was also decreased with JLC but did not reach statistical significance (5.7 ± 3.1 min vs. 6.2 ± 2.5 min; P = 0.081). When additional time for reshaping the JLC was not taken into account, mean procedure time was significantly decreased in the JLC group (5.6 ± 2.9 min vs. 6.2 ± 2.4 min; P = 0.031). There was a trend toward lower incidence of consumption of contrast medium in the 2C group (49 ± 13 mL vs. 52 ± 18 mL; P = 0.061). RAS was observed more frequently in the 2C group (11.3% vs. 21.7%, P = 0.005). There was a trend toward high incidence of RAO in the 2C group (4.1 vs. 8.3% P = 0.064).

Conclusion

In transradial procedures from RRA, a JLC catheter can be very effective when dedicated dual‐purpose catheter is not available.

     

Reduction in spasm with a long hydrophylic transradial sheath

Objectives: We aimed to assess the efficiency of a long hydrophilic sheath in reducing radial spasm for transradial approach. Background: Despite a lower access site complication rate, cardiac catheterization using transradial approach is not widely used. Radial spasm is one of the main issues for transradial angiography and percutaneous interventions. We assumed that radial artery protection using a long hydrophilic‐coated sheath would reduce radial spasm compared to a bare short sheath. Methods: Three hundred and fifty one patients (pts) admitted for transradial coronary angiography ± percutaneous coronary interventions were randomly assigned to a long hydrophilic‐coated or a short sheath (control group). Primary end point was the occurrence of a radial spasm defined by significant patient pain evaluated by scale score (>4) or significant catheter frictions during manipulation. Procedure failure, radial occlusion, and local complications were also assessed. Results: Radial spasm was significantly reduced when using the long‐coated compared to the short sheath in 7 (4%) vs. 32 pts (18%) P < 0.001. No difference was found regarding procedure failure respectively 1.2% vs. 0.6%, local complication 0.6% vs. 1.2%, and radial occlusion 3.5% vs. 3.5%. Conclusion: Radial artery protection using the long hydrophilic‐coated sheath was efficient in the prevention of radial spasm for transradial approach. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

New device for compression of the radial artery after diagnostic and interventional cardiac procedures

Recently the transradial route has emerged as a valuable alternative to the femoral approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty. However, sheath and catheter size and their immediate removal after the procedure, combined with aggressive antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies, have favored mechanical compression of the radial artery to achieve satisfactory hemostasis. We report on our initial clinical experience with a new device specially designed for prolonged controlled mechanical compression of the radial artery (the RadiStop™ radial compression system, RADI Medical Systems AB, Uppsala, Sweden). A total of 159 consecutive patients (mean age 60 ± 11 yr, 130 males) who required either coronary angiography (group 1, 103 patients) or ad hoc or elective coronary angioplasty (group 2, 56 patients) via the right radial route had local hemostasis with the RadiStop™ system. In group 1, 4F and 5F sheaths and catheters were used, whereas in group 2, 6F systems were inserted in the radial artery. Hemostasis was achieved with the device in all patients but was considered difficult to obtain in 4 patients (2.5%). Twenty-eight patients (18%) considered the device uncomfortable or painful, but no release of pressure was necessary. The mean compression time was 151 ± 82 min (114 ± 64 min in group 1, and 223 ± 64 min in group 2; P = 0.0001). There were 23 local complications (15%). In 7 patients (4.4%), the radial pulse was absent after compression and at discharge, without major clinical consequences. In one patient, recurrent bleeding occurred 2 hr after compression, requiring a new compression session. In 15 patients, a small local hematoma was observed. Neither heparin dosage nor the use of a 6F sheath affected the rate of radial artery patency in this survey. We conclude that the use of this device for mechanical compression of the radial artery after coronary angiography and angioplasty is efficient, and that its use is related to an acceptable rate of local complications. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn. 40:297–300, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss. Inc.     

Transradial approach for noncoronary angiography and interventions.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the feasibility and safety of a transradial approach for non-coronary angiography and interventions. BACKGROUND: Generally, the transradial approach is used for coronary angiography and intervention around the world, and experiences have been widely reported. However, few large studies have examined the transradial approach for vessels other than the coronary or cerebral artery. METHODS: Subjects comprised 329 patients who underwent a total of 400 procedures (285 abdomens, 68 pelvises, and 47 lower limbs) with transradial angiography and interventions between January 1999 and June 2006. Normal Allen test results were confirmed before all procedures. A 130- or 150-cm long 4F catheter modified to our own design was used for angiography and interventions such as transarterial embolization or transarterial chemotherapy. RESULTS: Radial artery access was unachievable in 19 of the 400 procedures (4.8%). The radial artery was injured during 1 procedure (0.2%). In the remaining 380 procedures, sufficient angiography was obtained to grasp the condition of indispensable vessels for diagnosis and interventions scheduled in advance succeeded. Total transradial technical success rate in the series was 95%. Frequency of complications such as radial injury or radial spasm was 1.8%. No cases of local hematoma, hand ischemia, or cerebral infarction were encountered. CONCLUSION: The transradial approach was useful for non-coronary angiography and interventions and offers the advantages of low risk and reduced stress on patients.     

Randomized comparison of transradial coronary angiography via right or left radial artery approaches

Previous studies have shown that the right radial approach encounters more tortuosity than the left radial approach during transradial coronary angiography. The objective of this study was to compare the procedural difficulty of the right and left radial approaches in the modern era with dedicated transradial catheters. One hundred ninety-three patients scheduled for transradial coronary angiography with normal Allen test results and without histories of coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized to the right or left radial approach. The choice of catheter was left to the discretion of the operator, with the preferred catheter being a dedicated transradial Optitorque catheter. The primary end point was procedural difficulty, defined as (1) hydrophilic or coronary wire use for tortuosity, (2) stiff wire use for the coronary engagement, (3) multiple catheters used, or (4) nonselective injection. The clinical characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Procedural success was achieved in 98 of 101 (98%) in the right radial group and 91 of 92 (99%) in the left radial group. Procedural difficulty, fluoroscopy time, and contrast use were similar between the 2 groups. The use of a single catheter was more common in the right radial group (73% vs 18%, p <0.001). In conclusion, procedural success and difficulty were similar in the comparison groups. The right and left radial approaches are feasible and effective to perform coronary angiography and intervention.     

血管活性物质与桡动脉痉挛关系的配对病例对照研究

目的桡动脉痉挛是经桡动脉介入诊疗中最常见的并发症。本研究初步探讨血管活性物质和桡动脉痉挛的关系,为临床桡动脉痉挛的预防提供理论依据。方法本研究为前瞻性、配对病例对照研究。所有患者均为仅接受经桡动脉冠状动脉造影的患者,按照性别相同,年龄相差2岁以内进行1:2配对。痉挛的判断使用临床桡动脉痉挛的定义。检测两组患者血清一氧化氮、内皮素-1、前列环素、血栓素A2、去甲肾上腺素浓度,并多因素回归分析桡动脉痉挛发生的危险因素。结果入选60例发生桡动脉痉挛的单纯冠状动脉造影患者,配对入选120例未发生桡动脉痉挛的单纯冠状动脉造影患者。痉挛组和对照组中一氧化氮[(63.5875±21.2763)μmol/L比(55.6425±18.1542)μmol/L,F=7.442,P=0.351]和血栓素A2[(0.9768±0.1953)ng/ml比(0.7824±0.2051)ng/ml,F=1.058,P=0.284]浓度差别没有统计学意义,内皮素-1[(298.5839±65.3291)ng/ml比(81.4391±20.4283)ng/ml,F=2.034,P<0.001]和去甲肾上腺素[(202.3721±38.3829)ng/ml比(56.4828±15.6025)ng/ml,F=39.267,P=0.005]高于对照组,前列环素[(8.8294±2.5322)pg/ml比(15.5430±4.8267)pg/ml,F=14.586,P=0.038]低于对照组。多因素回归分析发现,内皮素-1(OR2.954,95%CI1.569～5.354,P=0.005)和去甲肾上腺素(OR4.642,95%CI2.619～8.332,P=0.018)是术中发生桡动脉痉挛的危险因素。结论内皮素-1和去甲肾上腺素浓度是术中桡动脉痉挛发生的危险因素。