2016
Short sheath benefit in radial artery injury after PCI - optical coherence tomography serial study
NOVÁKOVÁ, Tereza; Jan KAŇOVSKÝ; Roman MIKLÍK; Otakar BOČEK; Martin POLOCZEK et al.Základní údaje
Originální název
Short sheath benefit in radial artery injury after PCI - optical coherence tomography serial study
Autoři
NOVÁKOVÁ, Tereza; Jan KAŇOVSKÝ; Roman MIKLÍK; Otakar BOČEK; Martin POLOCZEK; Petr JEŘÁBEK; Lenka PRÝMKOVÁ; Tomáš ONDRÚŠ; Jiří JARKOVSKÝ ORCID; Klára BENEŠOVÁ; Jindřich ŠPINAR a Petr KALA
Vydání
Biomedical Papers of the Faculty of Medicine of Palacký University, Olomouc, Palacký University, 2016, 1213-8118
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
30201 Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems
Stát vydavatele
Česká republika
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 0.894
Označené pro přenos do RIV
Ano
Kód RIV
RIV/00216224:14110/16:00093219
Organizační jednotka
Lékařská fakulta
UT WoS
EID Scopus
Klíčová slova anglicky
optical coherence tomography; radial artery; injury; introducer
Štítky
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 4. 4. 2017 13:24, Soňa Böhmová
Anotace
V originále
Background and Aims: Transradial catheterization is the predominant access site for coronary catheterization and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Previous studies have reported a high incidence of radial artery (RA) injury. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the incidence of RA injury using last generation optical coherence tomography (OCT) intravascular imaging in a serial manner. Methods: 100 patients with a diagnosis of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (nSTEMI) treated by PCI were enrolled. OCT of RA was performed immediately after the index PCI. OCT was repeated 9 months later. Results: There were 11 patients with RA injuries (11.0%) at baseline, including 3 patients with RA medial dissection and 8 patients with intimal tears. In the follow-up OCT data, the number of RA injuries was 10 (10.0%), including 7 patients with RA medial dissection and 3 patients with intimal tear. All injuries were clinically asymptomatic and there was no finding of vessel perforation. There was no significant difference between the baseline and follow-up procedure in terms of number of injuries. Conclusion: The study showed no significant difference between baseline and follow-up RA injury incidence. There was a higher risk of radial injury for repeated catheterization in women. The conclusion is that radial catheterization is a very safe procedure in terms of radial artery damage. This is evidenced by considerably fewer injuries compared to published studies. The use of the short radial sheath (7 cm in this study) is protective and reduces the incidence of radial injury.