经皮桡动脉和股动脉行冠心病介入治疗的护理比较被引量：1

导出

摘要目的：对比经皮桡动脉与经皮股动脉穿刺途径行冠状动脉介入（PCI）的护理特点差别.方法：根据介入途径不同将我院255例急性心肌梗死住院病人分为经股动脉组（125例）与经桡动脉组（130例）,对比与观察两组平均住院天数、术后并发症等方面的差异.结果：经桡动脉组在术后卧床时间、平均住院时间以及皮下血肿、假性动脉瘤、排便困难、迷走神经反射术后并发症发生率等方面均低于股动脉组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）.结论：两种途径行冠脉介入术后的效果基本相似,但经桡动脉途径穿刺行PCI术具有术后并发症发生率低,平均住院时间短,患者痛苦小等优点.

作者曾笑霞徐志奇邓月银江海棠

机构地区广东省广州市花都区人民医院

出处《按摩与康复医学》 2012年第5期157-158,共2页 Chinese Manipulation and Rehabilitation Medicine

关键词冠心病股动脉桡动脉护理

分类号 R47 [医药卫生—护理学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献4

1黄震华.冠状动脉内安放支架:世纪末的回顾和展望[J].国外医学（内科学分册）,2000,27(3):107-110. 被引量：6
2傅向华,马宁,刘君,吴伟力,谷新顺,李世强,姜云发,屈长强,李亮,郝国桢,刘晓堃,王占启,田英平.经桡动脉与股动脉入径直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗急性心肌梗死的对比研究[J].中华心血管病杂志,2003,31(8):573-577. 被引量：54
3Freed M,G rines C,Safian RD,et al The new manual of interventional-cardiology[M].M ichigan Physicians Press 1996 65-73.
4王玉芬,孟洁,武丽萍.心脏介入术后穿刺部位外周血管并发症的观察及护理[J].齐鲁护理杂志,2001,7(2):95-95. 被引量：14

二级参考文献16

1Kim MH, Cha KS, Kim H J, et al. Primary stenting for acute myocardial infarction via the transradial approach: a safe and useful alternative to the wansfemoral approach. J Invasive Cardiol,2000,12 :292-296.
2Mathias DW, Bigler L. Transradial coronary angioplasty and stent implantation in acute myocardial infarction: initial experience. J Invasive Cardiol,2000 ,12:547-549.
3Louvard Y, Lefevre T, Allain A, et al. Coronary angiography through the radial or the femoral approach: The CARAFE study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv,2001,52 : 181-187.
4Louvard Y, Ludwig J, Lefevre T, et at. Transradial approach for coronary angioplasty in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: a dual center registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2002,55:206-211.
5Saito S, Miyake S, Hosokawa G, et at. Transradial coronary intervention in Japanese patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 1999,46:37-42.
6Wu CJ, Lo PH, Chang KC, et al. Transradial coronary angiography and angioplasty in Chinese patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Diag,1997,40:159-163.
7Saito S, Ikei H, Hosokawa G, et at. Influence of the ratio between radial artery inner diameter and sheath outer diameter on radial artery flow after transradial coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 1999,46 : 173-178.
8Yakubov SJ, George KS. Brachial and radial approach to coronary intervention. In: Freed M, Grines C, Safian RD, eds. The new manual of interventional cardiology. Michigan: Physician' s Press, 1996.65-73.
9Mann T, Cubeddu G, Bowen J, et al. Stentlng in acute coronary syndromes: a comparison of radial versus femoral access sites. J Am Coll Cardlol, 1998,32:572-576.
10Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerkea D, et al. A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by radial,brachial and femoral approaches: the ACCESS study. J Am Coil Cardial, 1997,79 : 1239-1241.