Interventionists Used to the Radial Approach No Longer Associated with Worse Femoral

radial approach vs femoralThe transradial approach is being increasingly adopted as preferred access site, since it is more comfortable for patients, reduces vascular and bleeding complications, is cost effective and reduces mortality in high risk patients. This has created concern about the fact that operators and institutions could become unfamiliar with the transfemoral approach.

 

The aim of this study was to determine whether the shift in favor of the transradial approach in everyday practice could negatively impact femoral approached PCI.

 

A retrospective analyzis of 235,250 transfemoral PCI patients was carried out in 92 UK centers between 2007 and 2013.  Researchers evaluated in-hospital vascular complications and mortality rates at 30 days.

 

After adjusting for multiple variables, no independent association was found between 30 day mortality and patients intervened via radial/femoral approach in each center, and similarly, femoral procedure volume was not found to be significant.

 

In-hospital vascular complications rate was 1%, and was not associated with the proportion of patients intervened via radial/femoral approach in each center.

 

Conclusion

Radial artery as chosen access site was not associated with loss of femoral artery proficiency or increased femoral artery puncture complications.

 

Original Title: Increased Radial Access Is Not Associated With Worse Femoral Outcomes for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United Kingdom.

Reference: Hulme W et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Feb;10(2):e004279.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Intravascular Imaging-Guided PCI vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Multiple randomized clinical trials have demonstrated superior outcomes with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main...

AHA 2025 | OCEAN Study: Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelet Therapy After Successful Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

After a successful atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, the need to maintain long-term anticoagulation (AC) remains uncertain, especially considering the very low residual embolic risk...

AHA 2025 | VESALIUS-CV: Evolocumab in High-Cardiovascular-Risk Patients Without Prior MI or Stroke

LDL cholesterol is a well-established factor for cardiovascular disease. Therapy with PCSK9 inhibitors, including evolocumab, has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....