Fluoroscopy-Guided vs. Ultrasound-Guided Transfemoral Access in Complex PCI: Results of the ULTRACOLOR Study

During complex percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), it is common to use large-caliber guidewire catheters to provide greater support. Large-caliber transradial access has proven to be viable and safe in such procedures. However, a small radial artery, severe spasm, or variant anatomy are contraindications for this access, making transfemoral access a better choice in these cases.

¿Deberíamos adoptar el uso rutinario del ultrasonido para guiar el acceso femoral?

The use of ultrasound-guided puncture for transfemoral access has been shown to reduce vascular complications, but its use is not a routine procedure. In the recent UNIVERSAL clinical trial, ultrasound-guided transfemoral puncture did not result in a significant reduction in bleeding or vascular complications compared to fluoroscopy-guided access.

 It is worth noting that one of the limitations of this trial was the low proportion of complex PCI cases and that most of the accesses used were 6 Fr. It is currently unclear whether there is any benefit in using ultrasound to guide transfemoral access in the case of large-caliber catheters (>7 Fr).

The objective of this multicenter randomized study was to demonstrate the superiority of ultrasound over fluoroscopy in complex PCI, specifically in terms of bleeding and/or vascular complications (BARC 2, 3, 5) that require intervention during hospitalization.

Lea también: Tratamiento borde a borde en la válvula tricuspídea: evolución a un año.

The primary endpoint (PE) was defined as clinically relevant bleeding at the access site or a vascular complication that required intervention during hospitalization. The secondary endpoint (SE) covered safety and efficacy aspects, including BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding at the transfemoral access site at 30 days of follow-up, BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding at secondary femoral or radial artery sites, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 30 days, vascular complications that did not require intervention, procedure time, access time, and success rate at the first puncture.

The study included a total of 544 patients, of whom 274 were randomized to the ultrasound-guided group and 270 to the fluoroscopy-guided group. The mean age was 71 years, and 76% of the subjects were men. The most frequent indication for complex PCI was stable angina, and 68% of patients required PCI for chronic total occlusion. The PE occurred in 18.9% of the fluoroscopy-guided group, compared with 15.7% of the ultrasound-guided group (p=0.32). 

The success rate for the first puncture was 92% for the ultrasound-guided group, compared with 85% for the fluoroscopy-guided group (p=0.02). The median catheterization lab time was 102 minutes for the ultrasound group and 105 minutes for the fluoroscopy group (p=0.43), while the MACE rate at one month was 4.1% for the fluoroscopy group and 2.6% for the ultrasound-guided access group (p=0.32).

Conclusión 

Routine use of ultrasound to guide transfemoral puncture in complex PCI did not significantly reduce clinically relevant bleeding or vascular complications compared with fluoroscopy, although it did improve first puncture success.

Original Title: Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided large-bore femoral access in PCI of complex coronary lesions: the international, multicentre, randomised ULTRACOLOR Trial.

Reference: Thomas A. Meijers , MD et al EuroIntervention 2024;20:e876-e886.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

Dr. Andrés Rodríguez
Dr. Andrés Rodríguez
Member of the Editorial Board of solaci.org

Más artículos de este Autor

ACC 2025 | FAME 3: FFR Guided PCI vs CABG 5 Year Outcomes.

Earlier studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) have shown fewer events at long term for the surgical strategy.  However,...

CRABBIS Trial: Comparison of Different Provisional Stenting Sequences

Provisional stenting (PS) is the gold standard for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in most patients with coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL). Moreover, recent studies such...

Andromeda Trial: Meta-Analysis of Drug Coated Balloon vs. DES in Small Vessel DeNovo Lesions

The use of coronary stents vs plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), has allowed to reduce recoil and limiting flow dissection which were major limitation...

QFR vs. FFR: Is Coronary Revascularization Deferral Safe? Results from a FAVOR III Sub-Analysis

In cases of intermediate coronary lesions, functional assessment is recommended to aid the decision-making process regarding revascularization. There are several tools currently used to...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Artículos relacionados

Jornadas SOLACIspot_img

Artículos recientes

ACC 2025 | FAME 3: FFR Guided PCI vs CABG 5 Year Outcomes.

Earlier studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) have shown fewer events at long term for the surgical strategy.  However,...

ACC 2025 | API-CAT: Reduced vs. Full Dose Extended Anticoagulation in Patients with Cancer Related VTE

The risk of cancer related recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) will drop over time, while bleeding risk will persist. At present, it is recommended we...

STRIDE: Semaglutide in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease and Type II Diabetes

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a severe complication in patients with type II diabetes, primarily affecting peripheral vessels, especially below-the-knee (BTK) arteries. This condition...