| Objective To investigate the feasibility and safety of brachial or femoral approach for percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI)after transradial approach failed.Methods 232 patients who received coronary intervention after failure of radial artery puncture were randomly divided into brachial artery group(117 cases)and femoral artery group(115 cases).To compare the average puncture time,puncture success rate,X-ray exposure time,postoperative puncture point compression time,puncture site bleeding,pseudoaneurysm,incidence of vagal reflex,patients’ intraoperative pain sense and subjective feeling of postoperative position limitation compared by visual analogue scale(VAS).Results There were no significant differences in gender,average age,average body weight,body mass index(BMI),the proportion of acute myocardial infarction,unstable angina pectoris and other diseases(coronary artery bridge,X syndrome,etc.)between the two groups(P>0.05).There was also no significant difference in CAG ratio and CAG + PCI ratio between the two groups(P>0.05).It showed that there was no bias in patient selection between the two groups,and the baseline data was equal.There were no significant difference in puncture time,puncture success rate and X-ray exposure time between the two groups(P>0.05).The compression time of the brachial group was significantly shorter than that of the femoral group(P<0.05).The visual analogue scale(VAS)used in the subjective perception of intraoperative pain and postural limitation was significantly different between the two groups(P<0.01).There was no significant difference in the incidence of hemorrhage(subcutaneous congestion,hemorrhage and hematoma)between the two groups(P=0.315).Conclusion In the PCI approach,the brachial artery approach can take precedence over the femoral artery approach as an alternative to the coronary intervention treatment after the failure of radial artery puncture. |
PDF Full Text Request