A Meta Analysis of Distal Transradial Access vs. Conventional Transradial

Transradial access is currently the preferred access for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. However, about 7% of patients experience radial artery occlusion (RAO), which is not expressed by clinical symptoms. However, RAO is a limit for future interventions; it reduces the potential use of that artery as a conduit for aorto-coronary bypass and for the creation of arterio-venous fistula for hemodialysis.

Función de la mano luego del acceso radial distal, ¿es seguro?

This is why distal transradial access has been introduced as an alternative for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Randomized studies have shown a lower rate of RAO with distal access.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of distal vs. conventional transradial access in angiographic and interventional procedures.

The primary endpoint (PEP) was RAO presence at follow-up. The secondary endpoint (SEP) was the presence of in-hospital RAO, in addition to local hematoma, radial spasm, time to successful radial artery puncture, number of radial puncture attempts, time to introducer insertion, amount of contrast administered, fluoroscopy time, and change in access.

There were 6208 patients included, from 14 randomized studies. Regarding the PEP, the use of distal transradial access was associated with a lower risk of RAO at follow-up up to 60 days (risk ratio [RR]: 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23- 0.56; p < 0.001; number needed to treat [NNT] = 30), lower rate of in-hospital RAO (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.19- 0.53; p < 0.001; NNT = 28), and lower rate of hematoma EASY ≥2 (RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.96; p = 0.04; NNT = 107).

Read also: Hand Function after Distal Radial Access: Is it Safe?

 Regarding the SEP, there were no differences in the rate of local hematoma, radial spasm, or hemostasis time. However, the use of distal transradial access was associated with longer radial artery puncture time (p < 0.001), longer introducer insertion time (p < 0.01), higher number of puncture attempts (p < 0.001), and higher rate of access change (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis of randomized studies comparing distal vs. conventional transradial access among patients undergoing an angiographic study and/or therapeutic intervention showed that distal transradial access was associated with a lower risk of RAO and hematoma. However, it required more time for puncture and insertion of the introducer and more attempted punctures, and it resulted in high rates of access change.

Dr. Andrés Rodríguez.
Member of the editorial board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: Distal vs Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and/or Intervention A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Reference: Giuseppe Ferrante, MD, PHD et al J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2022;15:2297–2311.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Spontaneous Left Main Dissection: Clinical Characteristics, management and Outcomes

Courtesy of Dr. Juan Manuel Pérez. Spontaneous left main dissection in an uncommon, and potentially life-threatening, cause of acute MI. The aim of this study,...

Pretreatment with DAPT in Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Ongoing Debate?

In acute coronary syndrome (ACS) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become a fundamental pillar after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), preventing stent thrombosis and acute...

Another Blow for Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumo Counterpulsation? Randomized Study on Its Use in Chronic Heart Failure Progressing to Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a condition with extremely high mortality (around 50%). While most therapies for this pathology have been studied in CS secondary...

Radial Patency in Coronary Procedures: Is Heparin Enough or Should We Aim for Distal Transradial Access?

Transradial access is the preferred route in most coronary procedures due to its proven reduction in mortality compared to transfemoral access. However, one of...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Spontaneous Left Main Dissection: Clinical Characteristics, management and Outcomes

Courtesy of Dr. Juan Manuel Pérez. Spontaneous left main dissection in an uncommon, and potentially life-threatening, cause of acute MI. The aim of this study,...

Pretreatment with DAPT in Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Ongoing Debate?

In acute coronary syndrome (ACS) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become a fundamental pillar after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), preventing stent thrombosis and acute...

Measuring Post-TAVI Gradients and Their Implications: Are Invasive and Echocardiographic Assessments Comparable?

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered the treatment of choice for a significant proportion of patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. Outcomes have improved...