经桡动脉冠脉介入诊疗后两种压迫器止血效果的比较

Efficacy Comparison Of Two Hemostatic Devices After Transradial Coronary Intervention

目的:比较经桡动脉冠脉介入术后使用螺旋式和气囊式两种桡动脉压迫器的止血效果。方法 :随机抽取近2年来经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉介入术的400例患者,螺旋压迫器组、气囊压迫器组各200例,对单纯行冠脉造影者使用5F动脉鞘,而行PCI者根据情况使用6F动脉鞘。对两组患者的初次止血的成功率、肢体肿胀程度以及并发症的发生率进行比较。结果 :两组患者初次止血成功率及手掌肿胀程度并无差异,螺旋式压迫器组前臂肿胀的发生率高于气囊式压迫器组,但其皮肤并发症的发生率低于气囊式压迫器组。结论 :两种压迫器均可获得满意的止血效果,但在并发症的发生方面各具优势和不足,尚有改进的空间。

Objective To compare the efficacy of two different types of hemeostatic devices after transradial coronary intervention.Methods Four hundred patients undergone transradial coronary intervention in the past two years were randomly enrolled and divided into two groups： screw type group（200 cases） and air-bag type group（200 cases）.Diagnostic coronary procedures were performed using 4 Fr or 5 Fr sheaths,while 6 Fr devices were used for PCI.In each case at least 5,000 IU heparin was given.The primal hemeostatic achievement,swelling and skin complication of involved terminal were documented.Results No significant differences between two groups concerning about primal hemeostatic achievement ratio and occurrence of swelling of palm were found.But in screw type group,occurrence of swelling of forearm is greater than that in air-bag group,while occurrence of skin complication is lower than that in air-bag group.Conclusions Two different types of hemostatic devices are reliable after transradial coronary intervention,but both have some drawbacks to be overcome.