Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am Heart J ; 170(5): 880-6, 2015 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26542495

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with lower rates of access site complications and bleeding. However, elderly patients have more complex vascular anatomy and radial access may be more challenging in this population. There remains uncertainty regarding the role of radial access in elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. METHODS AND RESULTS: The RIVAL trial randomized patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing cardiac catheterization to radial versus femoral access. In this analysis, the rates of access site complications and access site cross-over were compared across different age groups. Among the 7,021 patients, 1035 (15%) were ≥75 years of age. Across all age categories, radial access was consistently associated with higher rates of access site cross over and lower rates of major access site complications, with no significant interaction between age and access site. Radial access was associated with lower rates of major vascular access site complications in patients ≥75 years of age (3.6% vs 6.6%; P = .03) and in patients <75 years of age (1.0% vs 3.2%; P < .001; P value for interaction = .2). The rates of access site crossover were higher with radial access among patients ≥75 (12.5% vs 2.6%; P < .001) and <75 (6.7% vs 1.9%; P < .001; P value for interaction = .9). There were no significant differences in the primary composite outcome (death, myocardial infarction, stroke or non coronary artery bypass graft major bleeding) or its individual components in either age group. In patients ≥75 years of age undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, there was no significant difference in procedure time (120 vs 115 minutes; P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the overall RIVAL trial population, elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization have lower rates of major bleeding or access site complications and higher rates of access site crossover with radial access compared to femoral access.


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico por imagem , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Angiografia Coronária/métodos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/cirurgia , Idoso , Feminino , Artéria Femoral , Humanos , Masculino , Artéria Radial , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 6(3): 258-66, 2013 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23517837

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare the radiation dose between radial and femoral access. BACKGROUND: Small trials have shown an increase in the radiation dose with radial compared with femoral access, but many were performed during the operators' learning curve of radial access. METHODS: Patients were randomized to radial or femoral access, as a part of the RIVAL (RadIal Vs. femorAL) trial (N = 7,021). Fluoroscopy time was prospectively collected in 5740 patients and radiation dose quantified as air kerma in 1,445 patients and dose-area product (DAP) in 2,255 patients. RESULTS: Median fluoroscopy time was higher with radial versus femoral access (9.3 vs. 8.0 min, p < 0.001). Median air kerma was nominally higher with radial versus femoral access (1,046 vs. 930 mGy, respectively, p = 0.051). Median DAP was not different between radial and femoral access (52.8 Gy-cm(2) vs. 51.2 Gy·cm(2), p = 0.83). When results are stratified according to procedural volume, air kerma was increased only in the lowest tertile of radial volume centers (low 1,425 vs. 1,045 mGy, p = 0.002; middle 987 vs. 958 mGy, p = 0.597; high 652 vs. 621 mGy, p = 0.403, interaction p = 0.026). Multivariable regression showed procedural volume was the greatest independent predictor of lower air kerma dose (ratio of geometric means 0.55; 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.61 for highest-volume radial centers). CONCLUSIONS: Radiation dose as measured by air kerma was nominally higher with radial versus femoral access, but differences were present only in lower-volume centers and operators. High-volume centers have the lowest radiation dose irrespective of which access site approach that they use. (A Trial of Trans-radial Versus Trans-femoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Access Site Approach in Patients With Unstable Angina or Myocardial Infarction Managed With an Invasive Strategy [RIVAL]; NCT01014273).


Assuntos
Angina Instável/terapia , Artéria Femoral/diagnóstico por imagem , Hospitais com Alto Volume de Atendimentos , Hospitais com Baixo Volume de Atendimentos , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Artéria Radial/diagnóstico por imagem , Doses de Radiação , Radiografia Intervencionista/métodos , Idoso , Angina Instável/diagnóstico por imagem , Competência Clínica , Feminino , Fluoroscopia , Humanos , Curva de Aprendizado , Modelos Lineares , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico por imagem , Estudos Prospectivos , Monitoramento de Radiação , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...