期刊文献+

冠状动脉介入性诊疗术后血管闭合装置与人工压迫止血比较的研究 被引量:3

Comparison of arterial puncture closure devices with standard manual compression after coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较血管闭合装置与人工压迫止血对经皮冠状动脉介入性诊疗术后外周血管并发症的影响。方法回顾分析2005年1月至2005年6月间,我院经股动脉介入性诊疗术后使用血管闭合装置与人工压迫止血后外周血管并发症的发生率。结果122例患者接受了PCI,60例患者采取人工压迫止血,术后卧床时间(12.10±0.76)h,血管穿刺部位血肿11例,动静脉漏1例,出血假性动脉瘤2例;62例患者使用血管闭合装置,术后卧床时间(6.65±2.10)h,血管穿刺部位血肿5例,无动静脉漏和出血假性动脉瘤。使用血管闭合装置组与人工压迫组相比,患者的术后卧床时间明显缩短[(6.65±2.10)h和(12.10±0.76)h,P<0.001),血肿(18.3%和8.1%,P=0.091)、动静脉漏(1.6%和0,P=0.323)、假性动脉瘤(3.3%和0,P=0.147)均有不同程度的下降,但差异无统计学意义。结论PCI后使用外周血管闭合装置可缩短患者卧床时间,提高患者舒适度,但并不能明显降低外周血管并发症的发生率。 Objective To evaluate the perivascular complications of hemostasis with vascular closure devices versus manual compression in the coronary artery angiography (CAG) and peroutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Methods Analysing retrospectively the perivascular complications in the 122 patients treated by CAG and PCI from January 2005 to june 2005, 60 patients stanched by manual compression and 62 by vascular closure devices. Results In the manual compression group(60), the time to ambulation (12.10±0.76)h, 11 cases with hematoma at access sites, 1 case with arteriovenous fistula, 2 cases with pseudoaneurysm. In the vascular closure devices group (62), the time to ambulation(6.65±2.10)h,5 cases with hematoma,and no case with arteriovenous fistula or pseudoaneurysm. Comparing the two methods, vascular closure devices application does improve patient satisfaction and time to ambulation[ (6.65±2.10)h vs.(12.10±0.76)h,P〈0.001 ] ,but the vascular complications of vascular closure devices were not superior to that of with manual compression. Conclusion Vascular closure devices application does improve patient satisfaction and time to ambulation, but not accompaniment with the reduction of vascular complications rates.
出处 《中国心血管病研究》 CAS 2006年第10期762-764,共3页 Chinese Journal of Cardiovascular Research
关键词 血管形成术 经腔 经皮冠状动脉 止血 外周血管疾病/并发症 Angioplasty,transulminal, percutaneous coronary Hemostasis. Periplasty vascular disease/complications
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

  • 1[1]Koreny M,Riedmuller E,Nikfardjam M,et al.Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization:systematic review and meta-analysis.JAMA2004,291:350-357.
  • 2[2]Silber S.Vascular closure devices for immediate sheath removal after coronary interventions:luxury or necessity? In:Ellis SG,Holmes DR.Strategic approaches in coronary intervention.edition 2.Baltimore:Lippincott Williams & Wilkins,1999.
  • 3[3]Duffin DC,Muhlestein JB,Allisson SB,et al.Femoral arterial puncture management after percutaneous coronary procedures:a comparison of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between manual compression and two different vascular closure devices.J Invasive Cardiol,2001,13:354-362.
  • 4[4]Nasu K,Tsuchikane E,Sumitsuji S.The clinical effectiveness of the Prostar XL suture mediated percutaneous vascular closure device for achievement of hemostasis in patients following coronary interventions:results of the Perclose accelerated ambulation and discharge (Paradise) trial.J Invasive Gardiol,2003,15:251-256.
  • 5[5]Chamberlin JR,Lardi AB,McKeever LS,et al.Use of vascular sealing devices (VasoSeal and Perclose) vs.assisted manual compression (Femostop) in transcatheter coronary interventions requiring abciximab (ReoPro).Cathet Cardiovasc Interv,1999,47:143-147.
  • 6[6]Nikolsky E,Mehran R,Halkin A,et al.Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy closure devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures.a meta-analysis.J Am Coll Cardiol,2004,44:1200 -1209.

同被引文献28

引证文献3

二级引证文献24

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部