【摘要】 背景 經(jīng)橈動(dòng)脈入徑行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療后橈動(dòng)脈閉塞(RAO)發(fā)生率較高,但目前尚缺少關(guān)于經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈入徑(dTRA)逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的大樣本量、長(zhǎng)期隨訪研究。目的 評(píng)估dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的可行性。方法 連續(xù)納入深圳市人民醫(yī)院心血管內(nèi)科2019年6月—2021年12月收治的TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療后出現(xiàn)RAO的患者44例。主要觀察指標(biāo)為dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功率,次要觀察指標(biāo)包括dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的可能預(yù)測(cè)因素、住院期間并發(fā)癥發(fā)生情況及術(shù)后3、6、12個(gè)月橈動(dòng)脈通暢率。結(jié)果 本研究dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功率為88.6%(39/44),根據(jù)dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈情況分為成功組(n=39)與失敗組(n=5)。失敗組患者糖尿病病史、吸煙、慢性冠狀動(dòng)脈完全閉塞比例高于成功組,行球囊成形術(shù)比例低于成功組(Plt;0.05)。兩組患者既往行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療次數(shù)比較,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Plt;0.05);兩組患者住院期間穿刺部位出血、血腫發(fā)生率比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Pgt;0.05)。成功組患者術(shù)后3、6、12個(gè)月橈動(dòng)脈通暢率分別為48.7%(19/39)、43.6%(17/39)、35.9%(14/39)。結(jié)論 dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈具有可行性,成功率高達(dá)88.6%,但遠(yuǎn)期通暢率低于50.0%;糖尿病、吸煙、既往行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療次數(shù)、慢性冠狀動(dòng)脈完全閉塞、未行球囊成形術(shù)可能是dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的影響因素;推薦RAO同時(shí)需擇期行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療的患者dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈。
【關(guān)鍵詞】 冠心病;冠狀動(dòng)脈疾病;經(jīng)皮冠狀動(dòng)脈介入治療;冠狀血管造影術(shù);動(dòng)脈閉塞性疾病;遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈;橈動(dòng)脈閉塞;前瞻性研究;可行性研究
【中圖分類號(hào)】 R 541.4 R 543.3 R 654.33 【文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼】 A DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0869
【引用本文】 袁銘培,林耀望,貝偉杰,等. 經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈入徑逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的可行性:?jiǎn)沃行那罢靶匝芯浚跩]. 中國(guó)全科醫(yī)學(xué),2023,26(27):3373-3377. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0869.[www.chinagp.net]
【Abstract】 Background The incidence of radial artery occlusion(RAO)after coronary intervention via transradial artery approach(TRA)is high. But there is a lack of long-term follow-up studies with a large sample size on retrograde recanalization of occluded radial artery via distal transradial artery approach(dTRA). Objective To assess the feasibility of dTRA for retrograde recanalization of occluded radial artery. Methods Forty-four patients undergoing retrograde recanalization via dTRA for treating RAO after coronary intervention via TRA were consecutively recruited from Shenzhen People's Hospital from June 2019 to December 2021. The primary observation index was postprocedural radial artery patency. And secondary observation index included possible predictors of failed retrograde recanalization,incidence of adverse events during hospitalization,and patency rates of radial artery at 3,6 and 12 months after procedure. Results The success rate of postprocedural radial artery patency was 88.6%(39/44),and divided into groups of successful(n=39)and failed(n=5)according to the result of the procedure. Compared with the successful group,the failed group had higher percentages of diabetics,current smokers and chronic total occlusion of the coronary artery,as well as a significantly lower prevalence of undergoing balloon angioplasty(Plt;0.05). There was significant intergroup difference in the times of coronary interventions(Plt;0.05);there was no significant intergroup difference in the incidence of bleeding or hematoma at the access site during hospitalization(Pgt;0.05). The patency rates of radial artery in successful group were 48.7%(19/39),43.6%(17/39),and 35.9%(14/39) at 3,6,and 12 months after procedure,respectively. Conclusion The dTRA may be feasible for retrograde recanalization of occluded radial artery,which showed a high procedural success rate up to 88.6%,but the long-term patency rate was less than 50.0%. Diabetes,smoking,times of coronary interventions,chronic total occlusion of coronary artery,and receiving no balloon angioplasty may be influencing factors of failed retrograde recanalization of occluded radial artery via dTRA. And dTRA for retrograde recanalization of occluded radial artery is recommended for patients with RAO who also require elective coronary intervention.
【Key words】 Coronary disease;Coronary artery disease;Percutaneous coronary intervention;Coronary angiography;Arterial occlusive diseases;Distal radial artery;Radial artery occlusion;Prospective studies;Feasibility studies
與經(jīng)股動(dòng)脈入徑相比,經(jīng)橈動(dòng)脈入徑(TRA)并發(fā)癥較少,在冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療中的應(yīng)用占比達(dá)90%以上[1],但TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療后橈動(dòng)脈閉塞(RAO)發(fā)生率較高。PROPHET研究表明,經(jīng)橈動(dòng)脈置管后24 h、30 d RAO發(fā)生率分別為12%、7%[2]。RAO一旦發(fā)生,則不僅無(wú)法再次TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療,也無(wú)法將其作為動(dòng)脈橋血管行冠狀動(dòng)脈旁路移植術(shù),或?qū)⑵渥鳛閯?dòng)靜脈造瘺的備用動(dòng)脈行血液透析治療。
遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈指發(fā)出掌淺支之后的橈動(dòng)脈,臨床實(shí)踐證實(shí)經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈入徑(dTRA)行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療術(shù)安全、有效,并有利于提高患者舒適性,縮短壓迫止血時(shí)間,減少出血并發(fā)癥及RAO的發(fā)生[3]。此外,由于遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈存在雙重供血,因此即使發(fā)生RAO后也有血液通過(guò)掌淺弓及掌深弓到達(dá)遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈,dTRA穿刺成功后可以完成閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的開(kāi)通。2018年,BALABAN等[4]研究(n=25)證實(shí)dTRA逆向開(kāi)通RAO后行冠狀動(dòng)脈造影安全、可行;2021年,SHI等[5]研究(n=15)證實(shí)dTRA對(duì)閉塞橈動(dòng)脈進(jìn)行再通安全、有效。目前,尚缺少關(guān)于dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的大樣本量、長(zhǎng)期隨訪研究。本研究為單中心前瞻性研究,選取44例TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療后出現(xiàn)RAO的患者為研究對(duì)象,dTRA逆向開(kāi)通其閉塞橈動(dòng)脈并進(jìn)行了為期12個(gè)月的隨訪,旨在評(píng)估dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的可行性,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1 對(duì)象與方法
1.1 研究對(duì)象 連續(xù)納入深圳市人民醫(yī)院心血管內(nèi)科2019年6月—2021年12月收治的TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療后出現(xiàn)RAO的患者44例,根據(jù)dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈情況分為成功組(n=39)與失敗組(n=5)。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):(1)經(jīng)彩色多普勒超聲檢查確診為RAO(橈動(dòng)脈血流信號(hào)完全缺失);(2)伴有手臂無(wú)力或劇烈疼痛;(3)伴有胸痛,需進(jìn)一步評(píng)估冠狀動(dòng)脈病變情況。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):(1)需行急診經(jīng)皮冠狀動(dòng)脈介入治療的急性冠脈綜合征患者;(2)未能觸及尺動(dòng)脈搏動(dòng)患者;(3)心源性休克患者。本研究經(jīng)深圳市人民醫(yī)院倫理審查委員會(huì)批準(zhǔn)(審批號(hào):LL-ZLJS-2021082),所有患者和/或其家屬對(duì)本研究知情同意并簽署知情同意書(shū)。
1.2 方法 采用Cordis Avanti橈動(dòng)脈穿刺套裝完成穿刺、置鞘,具體如下:(1)于鼻煙窩區(qū)或合谷穴區(qū)觸摸遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈搏動(dòng),選擇搏動(dòng)最強(qiáng)處作為穿刺點(diǎn);(2)采用利多卡因2~3 mL進(jìn)行局部麻醉,采用改良Seldinger穿刺法進(jìn)行穿刺;(3)穿刺成功后,使用刀片破皮并沿穿刺導(dǎo)絲送入橈動(dòng)脈鞘管,將鞘管頭端送入動(dòng)脈內(nèi)2~3 cm(圖1A)并經(jīng)鞘管推注肝素70~100 U/kg;(4)行橈動(dòng)脈造影以觀察橈動(dòng)脈、閉塞端、血栓負(fù)荷及側(cè)支循環(huán)情況(圖1B、1C),對(duì)于急性閉塞或具有高血栓負(fù)荷的慢性閉塞者,直接通過(guò)橈動(dòng)脈鞘管(最好使用7F薄壁鞘管)或抽吸導(dǎo)管進(jìn)行血栓抽吸(圖1D),對(duì)于非血栓負(fù)荷的慢性閉塞或血栓抽吸不成功、血栓抽吸后血流恢復(fù)欠佳者進(jìn)行球囊成形術(shù)(圖1E),必要時(shí)可使用0.014″導(dǎo)絲或0.025″導(dǎo)絲進(jìn)行輔助;(5)對(duì)于急性閉塞或具有高血栓負(fù)荷的慢性閉塞者,再通治療完成后通過(guò)微導(dǎo)管(日本Terumo)給予尿激酶連續(xù)溶栓治療6~12 h(圖1F);(6)最后行橈動(dòng)脈造影以確定橈動(dòng)脈前向血流是否恢復(fù)(圖1G)。所有患者dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的手術(shù)操作由同一位經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的醫(yī)生完成。
1.3 觀察指標(biāo) 主要觀察指標(biāo)為dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功率。經(jīng)橈動(dòng)脈造影確定前向血流恢復(fù),且經(jīng)多普勒超聲檢查確定血流恢復(fù)定義為dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功;經(jīng)橈動(dòng)脈造影確定前向血流未恢復(fù)定義為dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗。次要觀察指標(biāo)包括dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的可能影響因素(一般臨床資料、手術(shù)特征)、住院期間并發(fā)癥(包括穿刺部位出血、血腫等)發(fā)生情況及術(shù)后3、6、12個(gè)月橈動(dòng)脈通暢率。通過(guò)門診隨訪,采用多普勒超聲評(píng)估橈動(dòng)脈的通暢性。
1.4 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法 采用SPSS 22.0統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)軟件進(jìn)行數(shù)據(jù)分析。本研究計(jì)量資料均符合正態(tài)分布,以(x-±s)表示,兩組間比較采用兩獨(dú)立樣本t檢驗(yàn);計(jì)數(shù)資料以相對(duì)數(shù)表示,兩組間比較采用χ2檢驗(yàn)或Fisher's精確概率法。以Plt;0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2 結(jié)果
2.1 dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功率 本研究dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功率為88.6%(39/44)。
2.2 dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的可能預(yù)測(cè)因素
2.2.1 一般臨床資料 兩組患者年齡、性別、BMI、術(shù)中收縮壓、術(shù)中心率、高血壓病史、估算腎小球?yàn)V過(guò)率、左心室射血分?jǐn)?shù)、診斷、治療方案比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Pgt;0.05)。失敗組患者糖尿病病史、吸煙、慢性冠狀動(dòng)脈完全閉塞比例高于成功組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Plt;0.05);兩組患者既往行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療次數(shù)比較,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Plt;0.05),見(jiàn)表1。
2.2.2 手術(shù)特征 兩組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間、所用輔助導(dǎo)絲、使用球囊輔助、行血栓抽吸術(shù)比例及總手術(shù)費(fèi)用比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Pgt;0.05);失敗組患者中行球囊成形術(shù)比例低于成功組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(Plt;0.05),見(jiàn)表2。
2.3 住院期間并發(fā)癥發(fā)生情況 住院期間,成功組、失敗組各有1例患者出現(xiàn)輕微穿刺部位出血,1例患者出現(xiàn)穿刺部位血腫。兩組患者住院期間穿刺部位出血(χ2=1.320,P=0.082)、血腫(χ2=1.320,P=0.082)發(fā)生率比較,差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2.4 橈動(dòng)脈通暢率 成功組患者均完成門診隨訪,無(wú)一例失訪;術(shù)后3、6、12個(gè)月橈動(dòng)脈通暢率分別為48.7%(19/39)、43.6%(17/39)、35.9%(14/39)。
3 討論
RAO是TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療后的常見(jiàn)并發(fā)癥之一,發(fā)生率為0.8%~38.0%[6-7]。研究表明,與RAO發(fā)生相關(guān)的因素主要包括BMI、糖尿病、鞘管尺寸、抗凝劑的使用及壓迫止血時(shí)間[6,8]。對(duì)于RAO患者,雖然其掌淺弓雙重供血的存在很少會(huì)造成嚴(yán)重手部缺血,但仍可能會(huì)對(duì)手臂用力活動(dòng)造成影響或因急性閉塞而引起劇烈疼痛。同時(shí),RAO還會(huì)限制再次TRA行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療,雖然經(jīng)股動(dòng)脈入徑可以作為替代入徑,但經(jīng)股動(dòng)脈入徑行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)較高、患者舒適度較低[9]。此外,對(duì)于腎功能不全患者,RAO的發(fā)生使其喪失了將橈動(dòng)脈作為動(dòng)靜脈瘺備用動(dòng)脈的機(jī)會(huì)[10]。
自2017年開(kāi)始將dTRA作為冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療的新入徑以來(lái),其優(yōu)勢(shì)及潛在優(yōu)勢(shì)備受心血管介入醫(yī)生關(guān)注[3,11-12],并有一些學(xué)者積極探索了dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的可行性:SHEIKH等[13]于2018年報(bào)道1例既往行冠狀動(dòng)脈旁路移植術(shù)、多次行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療并伴有嚴(yán)重外周血管疾病患者dTRA成功完成左側(cè)RAO再通治療;LI等[14]于2021年報(bào)道1例急診經(jīng)皮冠狀動(dòng)脈介入治療后發(fā)生RAO患者dTRA成功實(shí)現(xiàn)橈動(dòng)脈再通。此外,一些小樣本量臨床研究證實(shí)dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈安全、有效,成功率介于88%~93%[4-5];本研究dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈成功率為88.6%,與之相符。本研究通過(guò)進(jìn)一步分析dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的可能預(yù)測(cè)因素發(fā)現(xiàn),失敗組患者糖尿病病史、吸煙、慢性冠狀動(dòng)脈完全閉塞比例高于成功組,行球囊成形術(shù)比例低于成功組,同時(shí)兩組患者既往行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療次數(shù)存在統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異,鑒于這些因素與橈動(dòng)脈痙攣、鈣化和側(cè)支循環(huán)不良有關(guān),因此其可能是導(dǎo)致dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的預(yù)測(cè)因素。
穿刺部位出血及血腫是dTRA穿刺的常見(jiàn)并發(fā)癥[4,15]。為提高dTRA穿刺成功率,應(yīng)注意以下4個(gè)方面:首先,術(shù)者應(yīng)具備豐富的dTRA穿刺經(jīng)驗(yàn)及較高的dTRA穿刺成功率;其次,超聲引導(dǎo)有助于提高dTRA穿刺成功率[16-17],條件允許情況下應(yīng)積極應(yīng)用超聲引導(dǎo);再次,鞘管送入遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈的深度以2~3 cm為宜,不應(yīng)送入太深,而若回抽鞘管未見(jiàn)血液流出,則應(yīng)當(dāng)確認(rèn)鞘管是在閉塞節(jié)段還是血栓之中,而不是在血管假腔中;最后,球囊跟蹤技術(shù)可以輔助導(dǎo)絲通過(guò)閉塞段[5]。
目前,RAO逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈的遠(yuǎn)期預(yù)后尚不清楚。BALABAN等[4]研究結(jié)果顯示,14例術(shù)中接受藥物涂層球囊治療的RAO再通患者術(shù)后1個(gè)月橈動(dòng)脈通暢率僅為33.4%。本研究結(jié)果顯示,成功組患者術(shù)后3、6、12個(gè)月橈動(dòng)脈通暢率分別為48.7%、43.6%、35.9%,高于BALABAN等[4]研究報(bào)道的橈動(dòng)脈通暢率,且本研究中患者并沒(méi)有接受藥物涂層球囊治療,分析其主要可能由動(dòng)脈狹窄形成機(jī)制不同導(dǎo)致。既往研究表明,藥物涂層球囊治療對(duì)于預(yù)防動(dòng)脈粥樣硬化引起的動(dòng)脈狹窄有效且持久,但在功能失調(diào)的透析通路或由反復(fù)穿刺引起的RAO中卻效果不佳[18-19],但藥物涂層球囊治療在維持橈動(dòng)脈通暢率中的作用尚需進(jìn)行隨機(jī)對(duì)照試驗(yàn)進(jìn)一步證實(shí)。
需要指出的是,由于術(shù)后橈動(dòng)脈通暢率仍處于較低水平,因此dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈手術(shù)可能更適用于RAO同時(shí)需擇期行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療的患者,而由于RAO逆向再通治療所用手術(shù)器械、材料仍可以繼續(xù)用于隨后的冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療,因此也有利于降低手術(shù)成本。對(duì)于1年內(nèi)無(wú)冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療手術(shù)需求且無(wú)癥狀的RAO患者,單純行dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈手術(shù)可能并不利于保持橈動(dòng)脈的通暢性。同時(shí),本研究還具有一定局限性:(1)失敗組患者例數(shù)過(guò)少,無(wú)法進(jìn)行多元邏輯回歸分析及傾向性匹配分析以確定dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的預(yù)測(cè)因素;(2)未開(kāi)展藥物涂層球囊與普通球囊應(yīng)用效果的比較以確定其是否適用于RAO的治療;(3)未分析經(jīng)多普勒超聲檢查獲得的血管參數(shù),如術(shù)前、術(shù)后的橈動(dòng)脈直徑等;(4)本研究為單中心研究,研究結(jié)果、結(jié)論尚需更大規(guī)模、多中心的隨機(jī)對(duì)照試驗(yàn)進(jìn)一步證實(shí)。
綜上所述,dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈具有可行性,成功率高達(dá)88.6%,但遠(yuǎn)期通暢率低于50.0%;糖尿病、吸煙、既往行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療次數(shù)、慢性冠狀動(dòng)脈完全閉塞、未行球囊成形術(shù)可能是dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈失敗的影響因素;對(duì)于RAO同時(shí)需擇期行冠狀動(dòng)脈介入診療的患者,推薦dTRA逆向開(kāi)通閉塞橈動(dòng)脈。
作者貢獻(xiàn):袁銘培負(fù)責(zé)研究的可行性分析、文獻(xiàn)檢索、統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)分析及論文撰寫;林耀望、貝偉杰、劉華東、董少紅進(jìn)行數(shù)據(jù)收集與整理,負(fù)責(zé)患者隨訪;林耀望進(jìn)行論文修訂,負(fù)責(zé)文章質(zhì)量控制及審校;孫鑫提出研究構(gòu)思并制訂整體研究目標(biāo),對(duì)文章整體負(fù)責(zé)。
本文無(wú)利益沖突。
參考文獻(xiàn)
AGOSTONI P,BIONDI-ZOCCAI G G L,DE BENEDICTIS M L,et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures;systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials[J]. J Am Coll Cardiol,2004,44(2):349-356. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.04.034.
PANCHOLY S,COPPOLA J,PATEL T,et al. Prevention of radial artery occlusion-patent hemostasis evaluation trial(PROPHET study):a randomized comparison of traditional versus patency documented hemostasis after transradial catheterization[J]. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv,2008,72(3):335-340. DOI:10.1002/ccd.21639.
KIEMENEIJ F. Left distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography(ldTRA)and interventions(ldTRI)[J]. EuroIntervention,2017,13(7):851-857. DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00079.
BALABAN Y,ELEVLI M G. It is both possible and safe to perform coronary angiography through the same radial artery,after retrograde recanalization of radial artery occlusion,following a previous coronary angiography[J]. J Interv Cardiol,2018,31(6):957-963. DOI:10.1111/joic.12524.
SHI G,LI F,ZHANG L,et al. Retrograde recanalization of occluded radial artery:a single-centre experience and literature review[J]. J Endovasc Ther,2022,29(5):755-762. DOI:10.1177/15266028211067732.
RASHID M,KWOK C S,PANCHOLY S,et al. Radial artery occlusion after transradial interventions:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Am Heart Assoc,2016,5(1):e002686. DOI:10.1161/JAHA.115.002686.
HAHALIS G,AZNAOURIDIS K,TSIGKAS G,et al. Radial artery and ulnar artery occlusions following coronary procedures and the impact of anticoagulation:ARTEMIS(radial and ulnar artery occlusion meta-analysis)systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Am Heart Assoc,2017,6(8):e005430. DOI:10.1161/JAHA.116.005430.
GARG N,MADAN B K,KHANNA R,et al. Incidence and predictors of radial artery occlusion after transradial coronary angioplasty:Doppler-guided follow-up study[J]. J Invasive Cardiol,2015,27(2):106-112.
ROH J H,LEE J H. Distal radial approach through the anatomical snuff box for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. Korean Circ J,2018,48(12):1131-1134. DOI:10.4070/kcj.2018.0293.
黃加君,張振建,王能. 經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)端橈動(dòng)脈治療動(dòng)靜脈內(nèi)瘺狹窄的臨床應(yīng)用[J]. 心腦血管病防治,2022,22(2):85-87. DOI:10.3969/J.Issn.1009-816x.2022.02.022.
AMIN M R,BANERJEE S K,BISWAS E,et al. Feasibility and safety of distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography and intervention[J]. Mymensingh Med J,2019,28(3):647-654.
KOUTOUZIS M,KONTOPODIS E,TASSOPOULOS A,et al. Distal versus traditional radial approach for coronary angiography[J]. Cardiovasc Revasc Med,2019,20(8):678-680. DOI:10.1016/j.carrev.2018.09.018.
SHEIKH A R,ABDELAAL E,SASTRY S,et al. Novel distal left radial artery access in anatomical snuffbox for recanalization of proximal radial artery total occlusion and percutaneous coronary intervention through left internal mammary artery[J]. Circ Cardiovasc Interv,2018,11(7):e006579. DOI:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.006579.
LI F,SHI G W,ZHANG B F,et al. Recanalization of the occluded radial artery via distal transradial access in the anatomic snuffbox[J]. BMC Cardiovasc Disord,2021,21(1):67. DOI:10.1186/s12872-021-01890-1.
SCHULTE-HERMES M,KLEIN-WIELE O,VORPAHL M,et al. Feasibility of transradial access for coronary interventions via percutaneous angioplasty of the radial artery in cases of functional radial occlusion[J]. J Invasive Cardiol,2018,30(10):355-359.
NAITO T,SAWAOKA T,SASAKI K,et al. Evaluation of the diameter of the distal radial artery at the anatomical snuff box using ultrasound in Japanese patients[J]. Cardiovasc Interv Ther,2019,34(4):312-316. DOI:10.1007/s12928-018-00567-5.
HADJIVASSILIOU A,KIEMENEIJ F,NATHAN S,et al. Ultrasound-guided access to the distal radial artery at the anatomical snuffbox for catheter-based vascular interventions:a technical guide[J]. EuroIntervention,2021,16(16):1342-1348. DOI:10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00555.
MALEUX G,VANDER MIJNSBRUGGE W,HENROTEAUX D,et al. Multicenter,randomized trial of conventional balloon angioplasty versus paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty for the treatment of dysfunctioning autologous dialysis fistulae[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol,2018,29(4):470-475. e473.
KITROU P,PARTHIPUN A,DIAMANTOPOULOS A,et al. Paclitaxel-coated balloons for failing peripheral bypass grafts:the BYPACS study[J]. J Cardiovasc Surg(Torino),2014,55(2):217-224.
(收稿日期:2022-12-13;修回日期:2023-03-23)
(本文編輯:鹿飛飛)