TCT 2024 | Distal Radial vs Transradial Approach in STEMI Patients

The transradial approach (TRA) has been recommended for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) for reduced bleeding complications and mortality. However, evidence in support of the use of distal radial access (DRA) in these patients is limited. This study aimed at showing DRA puncture success rate would be no inferior than that of TRA.

Primary endpoint was puncture success rate. Secondary endpoints included coronary angiography and angioplasty success rates, bleeding complications, puncture, procedural, hemostasis and fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization.

A total of 354 patients were randomized: 174 were assigned to DRA and 175 to TRA. Puncture success rate resulted 94.3% for DRA patients vs. 96.1% for TRA. 

Read also: STEACS and the Use of Bivalirudin vs. Heparin: In Search of BRIGHT-4 Outcomes.

Access site bleeding was more frequent among TRA patients vs. DRA, though not statistically significant. No significant differences were found when looking at secondary endpoints.

Conclusión  

In this multicenter study of STEMI patients, DRA vs TRA puncture success rate resulted inconclusive in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. However, DRA was shown non-inferior based on treatment. Large-scale studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Original Title: Comparison of Puncture Success Rate between Distal Radial Access and Transradial Access in Patients with ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Reference: Jun-Won LEE, MD, PhD et al TCT 2024.


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

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...