AIM   To explore the difference in hemostatic effects between elastic bandage compression hemostasis method and balloon pressure hemostatic device after percutaneous coronary intervention via radial artery (TRA-PCI) in male patients.

  METHODS  A total of 208 male patients who underwent TRA-PCI via right radial artery were divided into elastic bandage compression hemostasis group (n=105) and balloon pressure hemostatic device group (n=103) according to different methods of postoperative pressure compression hemostasis. Baseline data and the incidence of baseline and radial artery complications were compared between the two groups.

  RESULTS   There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, previous medical history, admission diagnosis and medication between the two groups . There were no significant differences in operative area bleeding, skin ecchymosis, upper limb swelling, hand cyanosis, tension blister, radial artery occlusion and upper limb suspension treatment between the two groups . The elastic bandage compression hemostasis group had lower upper limb numbness (0.00% vs. 2.91%, P<0.05), upper limb pain (0.00% vs. 5.83%, P<0.05) and overall events (4.76% vs. 17.48%, P<0.01) than the balloon compression hemostat group, and the difference was statistically significant. There was no vagus reflex and arteriovenous fistula in both groups.

  CONCLUSION  Radial artery elastic bandage compression hemostasis reduces postoperative complications in male patients after TRA-PCI compared with radial balloon compression hemostatic device.