Two different surgical pathways for urgent percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

Objective To compare the advantages and disadvantages in urgent percutaneous coronary intervention ( PCI ) with transradial or transfemoral approach,and to explore the feasibility of urgent PCI with transradial approach in primary hospitals.Methods 90 patients with acute myocardial infarction who needed interventional therapy were divided into transradial approach group ( n =45 ) and transfemoral approach group ( n =45 ).Time to balloon opening after medical visit,success rate of the procedures,incidence rate of complications,duration of X-ray exposure,and length of hospital day were compared between the two groups.Results The success rate of the procedures,time to balloon opening after medical visit,and duration of X-ray exposure did not differ significantly between the two group ( P ＞ 0.05 for all comparisons ).Length of hospital day were shortened and rate of complications were lowered in the transradial procedure group ( P ＜ 0.01 and P ＜ 0.05 ).Conclusions Urgent percutaneous coronary intervention with transradial approach has a higher success rate and fewer complications,can relieve the pain level in patients,and is suitable to apply in primary hospital.But the prerequisite is accumulation of large amount of experience on transfemoral coronary intervention and transradial coronary angiography. Key words: Acute myocardial infarction; Coronary intervention therapy; Radial artery; Femoral artery; Primary hospitals