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

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

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...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...