Switching From Proximal to Distal Radial Artery Access for Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion Recanalization.
CTO
chronic total occlusion
distal radial access
proximal radial access
radial artery occlusion
radiation dose
snuffbox approach
Journal
Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine
ISSN: 2297-055X
Titre abrégé: Front Cardiovasc Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101653388
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
13
03
2022
accepted:
20
04
2022
entrez:
26
5
2022
pubmed:
27
5
2022
medline:
27
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Distal radial access (DRA) was recently introduced in the hopes of improving patient comfort by allowing the hand to rest in a more ergonomic position throughout percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), and potentially to further reduce the rate of complications (mainly radial artery occlusion, [RAO]). Its safety and feasibility in chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI have not been thoroughly explored, although the role of DRA could be even more valuable in these procedures. From 2016 to 2021, all patients who underwent CTO PCI in 3 Hungarian centers were included, divided into 2 groups: one receiving proximal radial access (PRA) and another DRA. The primary endpoints were the procedural and clinical success and vascular access-related complications. The secondary endpoints were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and procedural characteristics (volume of contrast, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, procedure time, hospitalization time). A total of 337 consecutive patients (mean age 64.6 ± 9.92 years, 72.4% male) were enrolled (PRA = 257, DRA = 80). When compared with DRA, the PRA group had a higher prevalence of smoking (53.8% vs. 25.7%, SMD = 0.643), family history of cardiovascular disease (35.0% vs. 15.2%, SMD = 0.553), and dyslipidemia (95.0% vs. 72.8%, SMD = 0.500). The complexity of the CTOs was slightly higher in the DRA group, with higher degrees of calcification and tortuosity (both SMD >0.250), more bifurcation lesions (45.0% vs. 13.2%, SMD = 0.938), more blunt entries (67.5% vs. 47.1%, SMD = 0.409). Contrast volumes (median 120 ml vs. 146 ml, Using DRA for complex CTO interventions is safe, feasible, lowers radiation dose and makes dual radial access more achievable. At the same time, there was no signal of increased risk of periprocedural or long-term adverse outcomes.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Distal radial access (DRA) was recently introduced in the hopes of improving patient comfort by allowing the hand to rest in a more ergonomic position throughout percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), and potentially to further reduce the rate of complications (mainly radial artery occlusion, [RAO]). Its safety and feasibility in chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI have not been thoroughly explored, although the role of DRA could be even more valuable in these procedures.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
From 2016 to 2021, all patients who underwent CTO PCI in 3 Hungarian centers were included, divided into 2 groups: one receiving proximal radial access (PRA) and another DRA. The primary endpoints were the procedural and clinical success and vascular access-related complications. The secondary endpoints were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and procedural characteristics (volume of contrast, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, procedure time, hospitalization time).
Results
UNASSIGNED
A total of 337 consecutive patients (mean age 64.6 ± 9.92 years, 72.4% male) were enrolled (PRA = 257, DRA = 80). When compared with DRA, the PRA group had a higher prevalence of smoking (53.8% vs. 25.7%, SMD = 0.643), family history of cardiovascular disease (35.0% vs. 15.2%, SMD = 0.553), and dyslipidemia (95.0% vs. 72.8%, SMD = 0.500). The complexity of the CTOs was slightly higher in the DRA group, with higher degrees of calcification and tortuosity (both SMD >0.250), more bifurcation lesions (45.0% vs. 13.2%, SMD = 0.938), more blunt entries (67.5% vs. 47.1%, SMD = 0.409). Contrast volumes (median 120 ml vs. 146 ml,
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Using DRA for complex CTO interventions is safe, feasible, lowers radiation dose and makes dual radial access more achievable. At the same time, there was no signal of increased risk of periprocedural or long-term adverse outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35615565
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.895457
pmc: PMC9124806
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
895457Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Achim, Szigethy, Olajos, Molnár, Papp, Bárczi, Kákonyi, Édes, Becker, Merkely, Van den Eynde and Ruzsa.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Radiol Med. 2021 Apr;126(4):630-635
pubmed: 33155168
J Clin Med. 2021 Jan 12;10(2):
pubmed: 33445664
Sci Rep. 2021 Jun 24;11(1):13217
pubmed: 34168221
J Clin Med. 2021 Dec 20;10(24):
pubmed: 34945269
EuroIntervention. 2019 May 20;15(1):126-128
pubmed: 30277464
Circulation. 2019 Jul 30;140(5):420-433
pubmed: 31356129
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Mar 28;15(6):679-681
pubmed: 35331464
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Jan 10;15(1):22-32
pubmed: 34922888
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Sep 1;72(3):335-340
pubmed: 18726956
EuroIntervention. 2020 Feb 20;15(14):1278-1285
pubmed: 30666964
Korean J Intern Med. 2021 Mar;36(Suppl 1):S53-S61
pubmed: 32122114
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Aug;20(8):678-680
pubmed: 30314833
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Apr 07;9:872398
pubmed: 35463754
Pharm Stat. 2011 Mar-Apr;10(2):150-61
pubmed: 20925139
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Nov 25;12(22):2235-2246
pubmed: 31753298
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Apr 1;97(5):E743-E747
pubmed: 32790085
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Oct 22;11(20):2113-2119
pubmed: 30336816
J Neurointerv Surg. 2020 Aug;12(8):798-801
pubmed: 31915209
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022 Jun 15;62(1):
pubmed: 35092270
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2022 Jul;40:152-157
pubmed: 34848177
Open Heart. 2016 Aug 03;3(2):e000397
pubmed: 27547427
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010 Feb 15;75(3):366-8
pubmed: 20162704
EuroIntervention. 2021 Mar 19;16(16):1342-1348
pubmed: 31380781
Can J Cardiol. 2016 Feb;32(2):259-65
pubmed: 26315351
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Mar;6(3):258-66
pubmed: 23517837
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Apr 26;14(8):892-906
pubmed: 33888235
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Feb 22;14(4):361-373
pubmed: 33602431
EuroIntervention. 2014 Nov;10(7):824-32
pubmed: 24472679
Circulation. 2003 Apr 22;107(15):1972-7
pubmed: 12665484
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 May 10;8:673858
pubmed: 34041286
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018 Apr - May;19(3 Pt B):324-326
pubmed: 29055660
Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Nov 2;:
pubmed: 34737088