【摘要】 目的研究经左桡动脉途径行冠状动脉(冠脉)介入治疗的临床可行性。方法2006年1月-2007年5月,临床诊断为冠心病,Allen试验阳性患者295例,随机分为左桡动脉组(148例)和右桡动脉组(147例)。冠脉造影选用5FTIG造影导管,支架植入选用6F Judkin、EBU或Amplatz。比较两种途径在穿刺成功率、X线曝光时间、造影成功率、介入治疗时间、介入治疗成功率、特殊指引导管使用率等方面的差别。结果①冠脉造影:经左桡动脉、右桡动脉行冠脉造影血管穿刺成功率分别为96.62%和96.59%(P>0.05);X线曝光时间分别为(3.10±1.50)min和(3.13±1.47)min(P>0.05);造影成功率分别为95.94%和95.23%(P>0.05)。②冠脉介入治疗:经左桡动脉、右桡动脉介入治疗时间分别(18.25±12.58)min和(17.59±11.62)min(P>0.05),成功率分别为98.85%和97.80%(P>0.05),特殊指引导管使用分别为43.67%和76.92%(P<0.01)。结论左桡动脉途径能很好地完成冠脉介入治疗,可以作为冠脉介入的选择途径之一。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the feasibility of left transradial approach for percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods 295 patients who were clinically diagnosed coronary atherosclerotic heart disease were randomly divided into the left transradial artery approach group(n=148) and the right transradial artery approach group(n=147) for coronary angiography from Jan 2006 to May 2007.Selective coronary angiographies were performed with 5 F TIG catheters.Stents implanting were performed with 6F Judkin、EBU or Amplatz.The successful puncturing rates,under X-ray fluoroscopy,the successful coronary angiography rates,the PCI times,the successful PCI and the special guiding using rates were observed.Results ①There were no differences in successful puncturing(96.62% vs 96.59%) and coronary angiography rates(95.94% vs 95.23%),nor in times under X-ray fluoroscopy of puncturing([3.10±1.50] min vs [3.13±1.47] min,P>0.05) between the two groups.②There were no differences in the successful PCI rates(98.85% vs 97.80%) and in the PCI times([18.25±12.58] min vs [17.59±11.62] min,P>0.05) between the two groups.But there was a significant difference in the special guiding using rates(43.67% in the left group vs 76.92% in the right group,P<0.01).Conclusion For operators with significant experience,the left transradial approach can represent a safe and feasible method for performing PCI with similar results to those of the right transradial approach.更多还原