经桡动脉应用MAC指引导管行急诊冠状动脉造影和介入治疗的可行性

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2015.01.015

首都医科大学学报 ›› 2015, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (1): 78-83.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2015.01.015

• 心血管疾病的诊断与治疗 • 上一篇下一篇

经桡动脉应用MAC指引导管行急诊冠状动脉造影和介入治疗的可行性

郭金成, 王国忠, 朱芙丽, 陈文明, 柳子静, 徐荣, 张利彬

首都医科大学附属北京潞河医院心内科, 北京 101149

收稿日期:2014-12-10 出版日期:2015-02-21 发布日期:2015-01-31
通讯作者: 郭金成 E-mail:guojcmd@126.com
基金资助:
首都卫生发展科研专项项目(2011-7071-01).

Feasibility of single transradial MAC guiding catheter for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction

Guo Jincheng, Wang Guozhong, Zhu Fuli, Chen Wenming, Liu Zijing, Xu Rong, Zhang Libin

Department of Cardiology, Beijing Luhe Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 101149, China

Received:2014-12-10 Online:2015-02-21 Published:2015-01-31
Supported by:
This study was supported by Capital Health Research and Development of Special(2011-7071-01).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨经桡动脉应用MAC3.5指引导管行急性ST段抬高心肌梗死(ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction, STEMI)患者冠状动脉造影和介入治疗的安全性和有效性.方法前瞻性单中心、随机对照研究,自2011年8月至2012年4月,150例发病12 h内,拟行经皮桡动脉急诊介入治疗的STEMI患者按1∶1比例随机分成MAC 组(75例)和对照组(75例).MAC组直接应用MAC3.5指引导管行冠状动脉造影和介入治疗,对照组用多功能造影导管完成冠状动脉造影后选择指引导管行介入治疗.主要终点是操作时间和透视时间,次要终点是穿刺部位合并症和30 d复合事件(包括所有原因的死亡、心肌梗死或非冠状动脉搭桥相关的出血).采用意向性治疗分析.结果两组基线资料相似.MAC组和对照组桡动脉交换到股动脉的比例(4.0% vs 3.5%),首选指引导管更换比例(10.7% vs 9.3%),局部麻醉至冠状动脉造影完成时间[(7.2±2.6)min vs(7.1±2.3)min]和门囊时间[(86.1±39.4)min vs (88.8±36.3)min],差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05).与对照组相比, MAC组的急诊介入治疗(percutaneous coronary intervention, PCI)操作时间、总操作时间和透视时间均明显缩短[(23.7±9.6)min vs (29.0±12.0)min, P=0.003; (30.9±10.4)min vs (36.4±12.3)min, P=0.004; (8.4±2.1)min vs (10.2±4.9)min, P=0.007].穿刺部位血肿两组各3例,保守治疗后好转.30 d复合事件发生率,MAC组和对照组分别为6.6%(5/75)和5.3%(4/75)(χ²=0.118, P=0.731).结论经桡动脉应用MAC3.5指引导管行STEMI患者造影和介入治疗能缩短操作时间和透视时间,该方法能否对临床事件产生有益的影响还需要进一步证实.

关键词: 心肌梗死, 血管成形术, 桡动脉, 导管

Abstract: Objective To investigate the feasibility of using a single guiding catheter (MAC 3.5) for left and right coronary angiography and intervention in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Methods This was a single-center, prospective, randomized study conducted from August 2011 to April 2012; Totally 150 patients with STEMI indicated for transradial primary PCI performed by an experienced transradial operator were randomized into two groups: MAC group (75 cases) consisted of patients who underwent coronary angiography and primary PCI by using a single guiding catheter (MAC3.5). Control group (75 cases) included patients who first underwent coronary angiography with Tiger diagnostic catheter followed by guiding catheter selection at the operator's discretion for intervention. The primary outcomes were procedural time and fluoroscopic time. The secondary outcomes were complications of puncture site and composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or non-coronary artery bypass graft (non-CABG)-related major bleeding at 30 days. Analysis was done by intention to treat mode.Results Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the MAC group and control group. Crossover from radial access to femoral access (4.0% vs 3.5%), guiding catheter exchange rate (10.7% vs 9.3%), procedure time of coronary angiography[(7.2±2.6) min vs (7.1±2.3) min] and door to balloon time [(86.1±39.4)min vs (88.8±36.3)min] in the two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05), respectively. Compared with the Control group, PCI procedure time, total procedure time and the overall fluoroscopy time were significantly shorter in MAC group[(23.7±9.6)min vs (29.0±12.0)min, P=0.003; (30.9±10.4) min vs (36.4±12.3)min, P=0.004; (8.4±2.1)min vs (10.2±4.9)min, P=0.007, respectively]. Local hematoma occurred in 3 cases in each of the two groups that improved after physiotherapy. The composite endpoints at 30 days was 6.6%(5/75)in the MAC group compared with 5.3%(4/75)in the control group (χ²=0.118, P=0.731), respectively.Conclusion A single transradial MAC 3.5 guiding catheter for coronary angiography and intervention seems to be a better option for patients with STEMI for whom primary PCI is planned. It can shorten PCI procedure time and fluoroscopy time. Further study is required to determine whether this strategy can favorably affect clinical outcomes.

Key words: myocardial infarction, angioplasty, radial artery, catheter

中图分类号:

R542.2

郭金成, 王国忠, 朱芙丽, 陈文明, 柳子静, 徐荣, 张利彬. 经桡动脉应用MAC指引导管行急诊冠状动脉造影和介入治疗的可行性[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2015, 36(1): 78-83.

Guo Jincheng, Wang Guozhong, Zhu Fuli, Chen Wenming, Liu Zijing, Xu Rong, Zhang Libin. Feasibility of single transradial MAC guiding catheter for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction[J]. Journal of Capital Medical University, 2015, 36(1): 78-83.

参考文献

[1] Mamas M A, Ratib K, Routledge H, et al. Influence of access site selection on PCI-related adverse events in patients with STEMI: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials[J]. Heart,2012, 98(4): 303-311.
[2] Baklanov D V, Kaltenbach L A, Marso S P, et al. The prevalence and outcomes of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardiol infarction: analysis from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry(2007 to 2011)[J]. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2013, 61(4): 420-426.
[3] Caputo R P, Tremmel J A, Rao S, et al. Transradial arterial access for coronary and peripheral procedures: executive summary by the Transradial Committee of the SCAI[J]. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2011,78(6): 823-839.
[4] Thygesen K, Alpert J S, Jaffe A S, et al. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction[J]. J Am Coll cardiol,2012,60(16): 158-198.
[5] Jolly S S, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes(RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial[J]. Lancet,2011,307(9775): 1409-1420.
[6] 杨遇春,吴明祥,张治平,等. 因ST段抬高误行急诊冠状动脉造影原因探讨[J]. 临床误诊误治,2013,26(6):48-51.
[7] 王京京,张晓春. 冠脉支架植入术后急性或亚急性支架内血栓形成患者的护理体会[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2014,43(7):666-667.
[8] Youssef A A, Hsieh Y K, Cheng C I, et al. A single transradial guiding catheter for right and left coronary angiography and intervention[J]. EuroIntervention, 2008,3(4): 475-481.
[9] Malaiapan Y, Leung M, Ahmar W, et al. Guideline recommended door-to-balloon time can be achieved in transradial primary PCI-the usefulness of a dedicated radial guide catheter[J]. Cardiovasc Revasc Med, 2013,14(1): 27-31.
[10] 徐泽升, 王炳勋, 宋志远,等. 经桡动脉应用一根指引导管完成急诊左右冠状动脉造影及介入治疗的可行性[J]. 中国介入心脏病学杂志,2009,17(3): 171-172.

[1]	苏文, 李虹伟, 陈晖, 李卫萍. 急性心肌梗死患者D二聚体质量浓度与远期预后的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(2): 173-177.
[2]	苗祖霈, 张迎花, 肖克令, 司瑾, 张浩宇, 李静. 肥胖程度对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者预后的影响[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(2): 192-198.
[3]	鲍博艺, 李卫萍. 外泌体miRNA在急性心肌梗死中的研究进展[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(2): 199-204.
[4]	孙昊, 郑美丽, 郭宗生, 张智勇, 李晓涛. 左心室收缩功能对经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的急性下壁ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者预后的影响[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(2): 305-310.
[5]	喻荣辉, 汤日波, 吴嘉慧, 闻松男, 林晖. 肾移植病史心房颤动患者导管消融的安全性及有效性分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(3): 433-438.
[6]	牛丹, 华琦, 柳子静, 李紫旋, 宋佳慧, 闫蕊, 王国忠, 张利彬, 郭金成. 首次和重复经桡动脉冠状动脉介入术后桡动脉无鞘区急慢性损伤的光学相干断层成像比较[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(3): 464-469.
[7]	乔莉, 曹洋, 袁宏勋, 王瑶. ICU中心静脉导管相关性血流感染的危险因素及病原菌分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2020, 41(1): 125-130.
[8]	郝鹏, 冯斯婷, 甄雷, 王晓, 王春梅, 聂绍平. SYNTAX II评分对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者直接PCI术后无复流的预测价值[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2019, 40(5): 744-748.
[9]	李靖, 高敬. 二尖瓣环自动追踪技术评价心肌梗死患者左心室收缩功能[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2019, 40(3): 379-382.
[10]	牛丹, 华琦, 柳子静, 闫蕊, 张利彬, 孙雨华, 王国忠, 张海滨, 郭金成. 经桡动脉冠状动脉介入术后桡动脉急慢性损伤的评估[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2019, 40(3): 383-388.
[11]	彭楠, 刘慧敏, 王伟新, 刘明, 王志群. 乳腺浸润性导管癌磁共振弥散及动态增强多参数定量分析研究[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2018, 39(2): 190-194.
[12]	张琪, 陈振文. 右冠状动脉慢性闭塞合并陈旧下壁心肌梗死病人右心功能的评价[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2017, 38(4): 609-614.
[13]	刘国亮, 张建敏. Arndt支气管内阻断器和双腔支气管导管在小儿单肺通气中的比较[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2017, 38(3): 361-364.
[14]	吴晴晴, 华琦, 薛淞, 张迎花, 司瑾, 李静. 白细胞计数与急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死病人直接经皮冠状动脉介入术中无复流的关系[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2017, 38(3): 372-376.
[15]	王国忠, 华琦, 柳子静, 郝明辉, 徐荣, 张利彬, 陈文明, 郭金成. 基层医院通过微信院前激活导管室对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死病人再灌注时间的影响[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2017, 38(3): 391-396.

经桡动脉应用MAC指引导管行急诊冠状动脉造影和介入治疗的可行性

Feasibility of single transradial MAC guiding catheter for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction

PDF

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价