【摘要】 目的比较经桡动脉和股动脉途径行冠状动脉造影的优缺点。方法将同期123例拟行冠状动脉造影的患者按股动脉途径和桡动脉途径分为两组,经股动脉组63例,经桡动脉组60例,比较其穿刺成功率、X射线照射时间、手术持续时间、术后住院时间及穿刺部位并发症。结果两组血管穿刺并完成造影的成功率和X射线曝光时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);经股动脉组手术持续时间小于经桡动脉组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);经桡动脉组术后并发症少于经股动脉组(P=0.021),且术后住院时间较短(P<0.01)。结论经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影局部并发症少,住院时间短,患者更易接受,是可选择的、较好的介入治疗方法。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To compare the advantages and disadvantages of the coronary angiography between transradial artery and transfemoral artery approaches.Methods 123 patients undgoing coronary angiography,according to the transfemoral artery and transradial artery approaches,were divided into the transfemoral artery group(63 cases) and the transradial artery group(60 cases) for comparing the success rate of puncture,X irradiation time,operation duration,postoperative hospital stay and complications at puncture sites.Results Difference in the puncture success rate and angiography success rate and X irradiation time between the two groups showed no statistical significan(P>0.05).The operation duration in the transfemoral artery group was shorter than that in the radial artery group with statistically significant difference(P<0.05).The postoperative complications in the trans radial artery group was less than those in the transfemoral group(P=0.021) and the former had shorter hospital stay(P<0.01).Conclusion Transradial artery coronary angiography has less local complications and shorter hospital stay,is more acceptable by patients and a selectable better method for interventional therapy.更多还原