经桡动脉和股动脉冠状动脉造影的对比研究

Comparison of transradial approach and transfemoral approach in coronary angiography

目的探讨经桡动脉和股动脉途径冠脉造影的优缺点。方法 2009年1月至2010年6月我院行冠脉造影的患者62例,应用随机分配表随机分为两组(桡动脉组30例,股动脉组32例),比较两组的穿刺成功率、造影成功率、手术操作时间、住院时间、住院费用及并发症。结果与股动脉组比较,桡动脉组住院时间(5.9±1.3)天,住院费用(7363.8±1124.9)元,无腰背痛、排尿障碍,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);而两组在穿刺成功率、造影成功率、手术操作时间方面差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与股动脉途径相比,经桡动脉途径冠脉造影安全有效,并发症少,无需卧床,住院时间短,费用低,患者易于接受。

Objective To explore advantages and disadvantages of transradial approach and transfemoral approach in coronary angiography.Methods A total of 62 cases who would receive coronary angiography in our hospital from January 2009 to June 2010 were randomly divided into two groups,radial group（n=30）and femoral group（n=32）.The artery puncture success rate,coronary angiography success rate,operation time,hospitalization time,hospitalization expenses and incidence of post-operation complications were compared and analyzed statistically.Results Radial group has shorter hospitalization time[（5.9±1.3）day],lower hospitalization expenses[（7363.8±1124.9）yuan] and fewer post-operation complications than feromal group and these differences are statistically significant.However,there is no statistically significant difference between two groups in artery puncture success rate,coronary angiography success rate and opration time.Conclusion Compared with transfemoral approach,transradial approach for coronary angiography is safe and effective with fewer vascular complications,no need to lie in bed after operation and shorter hospitalization time leading to lower hospitalization expenses,and therefore is more easily accepted by patients.