BACKGROUND:Transradial coronary intervention has been widely used because of its effects in lowering the incidence of complications in vascular access site and improving patient satisfaction compared to the femoral approach. This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of transradial approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: A total of 103 consecutive elderly patients (age = 65 years) who were diagnosed as having AMI were indicated for PCI. Among them, 57 patients received primary PCI via the transradial approach (transradial intervention, TRI group), and 46 underwent primary PCI via the transfemoral approach (transfemoral intervention, TFI group). The success rate of puncture, puncture time, cannulation time, reperfusion time, the total time for PCI, the success rate of PCI, the use rates of temporary pacemaker and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), and the total length of hospital stay of the patients in the two groups were compared. After the procedure, vascular access site complications and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in the two groups in one month were observed. RESULTS: The success rates of puncture (98.2% vs 100.0%) and PCI (96.5% vs 95.7%) for the patients in the TRI and TFI groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The puncture time ((2.4 +/- 1.1) vs (2.0 +/- 0.9) minutes), cannulation time ((2.7 +/- 0.5) vs (2.6 +/- 0.5) minutes), reperfusion time ((16.2 +/- 4.5) vs (15.4 +/- 3.6) minutes), total time of the procedure ((44.1 +/- 6.8) vs (41.2 +/- 5.7) minutes), use rates of temporary pacemaker (1.8% vs 2.2%) and IABP (0 vs 2.2%) in the two groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05), but the hospital stay of the TFI group was longer than that of the TRI group ((10.1 +/- 4.6) vs (7.2 +/- 2.6) days, P < 0.01). A radial occlusion was observed in the TRI group, but no ischemic syndrome in hand. In the TFI group, 4 patients had hematosis, 1 had pseudoaneurysm, and 1 had major bleeding. Statistical significance in vascular access site complications was seen in the two groups (1.8 % vs 13.1%, P < 0.05). Three patients died in the two groups respectively in one month, and there was no statistical significance in MACE in the two groups (5.3% vs 6.5%, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The transradial approach for primary PCI is safe and feasible for elderly patients with AMI.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Transradial coronary intervention has been widely used because of its effects in lowering the incidence of complications in vascular access site and improving patient satisfaction compared to the femoral approach. This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of transradial approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: A total of 103 consecutive elderly patients (age = 65 years) who were diagnosed as having AMI were indicated for PCI. Among them, 57 patients received primary PCI via the transradial approach (transradial intervention, TRI group), and 46 underwent primary PCI via the transfemoral approach (transfemoral intervention, TFI group). The success rate of puncture, puncture time, cannulation time, reperfusion time, the total time for PCI, the success rate of PCI, the use rates of temporary pacemaker and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), and the total length of hospital stay of the patients in the two groups were compared. After the procedure, vascular access site complications and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in the two groups in one month were observed. RESULTS: The success rates of puncture (98.2% vs 100.0%) and PCI (96.5% vs 95.7%) for the patients in the TRI and TFI groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The puncture time ((2.4 +/- 1.1) vs (2.0 +/- 0.9) minutes), cannulation time ((2.7 +/- 0.5) vs (2.6 +/- 0.5) minutes), reperfusion time ((16.2 +/- 4.5) vs (15.4 +/- 3.6) minutes), total time of the procedure ((44.1 +/- 6.8) vs (41.2 +/- 5.7) minutes), use rates of temporary pacemaker (1.8% vs 2.2%) and IABP (0 vs 2.2%) in the two groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05), but the hospital stay of the TFI group was longer than that of the TRI group ((10.1 +/- 4.6) vs (7.2 +/- 2.6) days, P < 0.01). A radial occlusion was observed in the TRI group, but no ischemic syndrome in hand. In the TFI group, 4 patients had hematosis, 1 had pseudoaneurysm, and 1 had major bleeding. Statistical significance in vascular access site complications was seen in the two groups (1.8 % vs 13.1%, P < 0.05). Three patients died in the two groups respectively in one month, and there was no statistical significance in MACE in the two groups (5.3% vs 6.5%, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The transradial approach for primary PCI is safe and feasible for elderly patients with AMI.
Authors: Peng Liu; Xue Liang Gao; Bei Fang Li; Xue Zhi Ding; Zi Hao Wang; Yan Ping Dang; Yang Gui Liu; Yun Fu Li Journal: Int J Clin Exp Med Date: 2015-10-15
Authors: Ahmad H S Mustafa; Eric Holroyd; Rob Butler; Doug Fraser; Magdi El-Omar; James Nolan; Mamas A Mamas Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 2.931
Authors: Seref Ulucan; Zeynettin Kaya; Ahmet Keser; Hüseyin Katlandur; Hüseyin Özdil; İsmail Ateş; Mehmet S Ulgen Journal: Int J Clin Exp Med Date: 2015-07-15
Authors: Ernesto Ruiz-Rodriguez; Ahmed Asfour; Georges Lolay; Khaled M Ziada; Ahmed K Abdel-Latif Journal: South Med J Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 0.954
Authors: András Komócsi; Dániel Aradi; Dániel Kehl; Imre Ungi; Attila Thury; Tünde Pintér; James J Di Nicolantonio; Adrienn Tornyos; András Vorobcsuk Journal: Arch Med Sci Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 3.318