血管闭合器在老年经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者中应用的安全性和有效性评价

目的评价Angio—Seal及Perclose止血器在老年冠脉介入治疗患者应用的效果及安全性。方法选取984例老年择期冠脉介入患者，分为3组，A组使用Angio—Seal血管闭合器（390例），B组使用Perclose血管闭合器（312例），C组采用徒手压迫法止血（282例），观察三组患者止血时间、卧床制动时间以及并发症的情况。结果A组，B组及C组的止血成功率为98．97％，97．76％，100．00％，差异无统计学显著性意义（P〉0．1）；止血时间分别为（1．2±0．4）min，（2．0±1．2）min和（21．5±5．6）min，卧床制动时间分别为（5．4±1．5）h，（6．5±2．3）h和（20．3±4．2）h，A组和B组明显短于C组（P〈0．05）；血管并发症发生率各组分别为3．60％、5．45％和10．28％，A组和B组亦明显少于C组（P〈0．05）。结论对于70岁以上的老年冠脉介入患者，术后应用Angio-Seal和Perclose血管闭合装置同样安全有效，优于徒手压迫止血法。

Safety and efficacy of vascular closure devices in elder patients after percutaneous coronary intervention

Objective To estimate the clinical safety and efficacy of vascular closure devices Angio-Seal and Perclose used in elder patients after coronary artery intervention. Methods A total of 984 cases aged over 70 years were divided into 3 groups using Angio-Seal (A) Perclose (B) or standard manual compression (C), respectively, to close the femoral artery access site. Hemostasis, bed rest time and complication rate were compared among the groups. Results The hemostasis time of 3 groups was (1.2±0.4)min, (2.0±1.2)min and (21.5±5.6)min, respectively, while bed rest time was (5.4±1.5)h, (6.5±2.3)h and (20.3±4.2)h. Vascular complication rate of these groups was 3.60%, 5.45% and 10.28%, respctively. Conclusion Compared with standard manual compression, Angio-Seal and Perclose arterial closure devices are both safe and effective in elder patients after coronary artery intervention.