经桡动脉与股动脉途径行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的对比分析

目的探讨经桡动脉和股动脉途径行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）的有效性、可行性与安全．性。方法选择冠心病患者272例，其中136例经桡动脉途径、136例经股动脉途径行PCI，比较两组患者手术时间、手术成功率等手术情况和并发症发生情况。结果两组患者术中造影时间、手术时间、穿刺成功率、造影剂使用量、曝光时间、PCI成功率差异无显著性（P〉0．05）桡动脉组穿刺时间和手术途径更换例数明显高于股动脉组，术后卧床时间明显短于股动脉组，术后并发症发生率明显低于股动脉组（P〈0．05）。结论经桡动脉途经和经股动脉途径行PCI临床疗效相似，但经桡动脉途径行PCI外周血管并发症及卧床相关并发症少，具有止血方便、患者活动不受限制、恢复快、住院时间短等优点，值得在临床推广应用。

Contrast analysis of means of radial artery and femoral artery percutaneous coronary intervention

Objective To analyze the effectiveness, feasibility and safety of the radial artery and femoral artery approach percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. Methods 272 cases of AMI patients were selected, 136 cases by radial artery, 136 cases by femoral artery approach line PCI. Operative time, surgical success rate and complications of surgical cases were compared. Results The imaging time, operative time, success rate, the amount of contrast agent used, exposure time, PCI success rate of two groups had no significant difference（P 〉 0.05）. Puncture time and the number of cases changing surgery way of the radial artery group were significantly higher than that of the femoral artery group, while after bed time was lower（ P〉 0.05 ）. The incidence of postoperative complications of the femoral artery group （27. 9%） was significantly higher than that of the radial artery group （8.8%）. Conclusion The clinical efficacy of the radial artery and the femoral artery through PCI is similar, but after radial artery PCI peripheral vascular complications and fewer complications associated with bed rest, with easy bleeding, the patient activity is not restricted, and faster recovery, shorter hospital stay advantages in clinical application.