| Autor: |
Márcio A. M. Truffa, Gustavo M.P. Alves, Fernando Bernardi, Antonio Esteves Filho, Expedito Ribeiro, Micheli Z. Galon, André Spadaro, Luiz J. Kajita, Raul Arrieta, Pedro A. Lemos |
| Jazyk: |
English<br />Portuguese |
| Rok vydání: |
2015 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, Vol 105, Iss 5, Pp 487-492 (2015) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
1678-4170 |
| DOI: |
10.5935/abc.20150110 |
| Popis: |
Background:Advantages and disadvantages of ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention have been described. However little is known about the radiation exposure of that procedure as compared with the staged intervention.Objective:To compare the radiation dose of the ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention with that of the staged procedureMethods:The dose-area product and total Kerma were measured, and the doses of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were added. In addition, total fluoroscopic time and number of acquisitions were evaluated.Results:A total of 568 consecutive patients were treated with ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 320) or staged percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 248). On admission, the ad hoc group had less hypertension (74.1% vs 81.9%; p = 0.035), dyslipidemia (57.8% vs. 67.7%; p = 0.02) and three-vessel disease (38.8% vs. 50.4%; p = 0.015). The ad hoc group was exposed to significantly lower radiation doses, even after baseline characteristic adjustment between both groups. The ad hoc group was exposed to a total dose-area product of 119.7 ± 70.7 Gycm2, while the staged group, to 139.2 ± 75.3 Gycm2 (p < 0.001).Conclusion:Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention reduced radiation exposure as compared with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed at two separate times. |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
