A comparison of nursing-related complications after coronary intervention through the radial or femoral artery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the incidence of nursing related complications in patients undergoing coronary intervention through either the radial or femoral artery and to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the two nursing approaches.

METHODS: Between September 2012 and June 2017, 360 patients underwent coronary intervention in radiology department and were enrolled in this study, 196 of these patients being assigned to the radial artery group and 164 of them to the femoral artery group. The postoperative adverse reactions and complications in these two groups were observed and recorded, and the results of the two groups were compared using a chi-square test and logistic regression.

RESULTS: The incidences of limb pain, restlessness and insomnia, low back pain, urine retention, bleeding and subcutaneous hematoma were significantly lower in the radial artery group than in the femoral artery group, but the rate of shifting approach or giving-up intervention due to artery spasm or deformity was significantly higher than that in the femoral artery group. However, the differences in the incidence of aneurysms and compartment syndrome between the two groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the femoral artery approach, the radial artery approach results in less trauma, fewer complications, and shorter bed rest time. It also puts less psychological pressure on patients, and is more easily accepted by them. Finally, it means simpler nursing, and, thus, it should be widely promoted.