мȸ ǥ ʷ

ǥ : ȣ - 530618   63 
Efficacy and Safety of 4F New Transradial Diagnostic Catheter; RM and CR Catheter for Engaging Both Left and Right Coronary Arteries
고려대학교 구로병원 순환기내과
나승운, 박지영, Kanhaiya L. Poddar, Sureshkumar Ramasamy, Lin Wang, 최병걸, 김지박,신승용, 최운정, 최철웅, 임홍의, 김진원, 김응주, 박창규, 서홍석, 오동주
Background: Transradial diagnostic coronary angiography becoming popular because its safety,shorter procedure time and few procedure compications. However, routine angiography using separate diagnostic catheter can easily induce severe radial artery spasm.Methods: We invented two new 4F diagnostic transradial catheter named RM and CR catheter for enging both left and right coronary arteries (LCA & RCA) only with one catheter. We tested these newer diagnostic catheters and conventional judkins catheter (JL) for 504 consecutive patients (pts) undergoing transradial coronary angiography. If we fail to engage at RCA, 035 wire was reinserted and assited the RCA engagement. We assessed the safety and success rate of RM and CR catheter and among the 3 different diagnostic catheters.Results: Out of total 504 pts, overall success rate of RM (95.1%) and CR (86.6%) catheter were excellent even without 035 wire assist compared with conventional JL catheter (63.7%), and RM & CR catheters achieved significantly higher success rate regardless of wire assist as compared with JL catheter. Overall success rate of RM was superior to CR catheters (Table). There were no major complications including intractable radial artery spasm, bleeding complications.Conclusion: Ther newer generation 4F RM and CR transradial diagnostic coronary angiography catheter achieved very high success rate for both LCA & RCA without any significant complications. The overall feature will be shown at the time of presentation.

Table: Independent and 035 Wire-Assisted Success Rate for engaging both LCA & RCA

Overall Success Rate with/without Wire Assist

N (%)

No-Wire Assist

Wire Assist

TOTAL

RM catheter

121 (94.5)

14 (100)

135 (95.1)

CR catheter

94  (87.0)

3  (75.0)

97 (86.6)

JL catheter

149 (62.6)

7 (100)

156 (63.7)

RM vs JL

RM Success Rate Compared with Judkins

 

RM

JL

p-value

   135 (95.1)

156 (63.7)

<0.001

CR vs JL

CR Success Rate Compared with Judkins

 

CR

JL

p-value

97 (86.6)

156 (63.7)

<0.001

RM vs CR

RM Success Rate Compared with CR

 

RM

CR

p-value

   134 (95)

97 (86.6)

0.024

 



[ư]


logo 학술대회일정 사전등록안내 초록등록안내 초록등록/관리 숙박 및 교통 안내 전시안내