Frequency of ventriculography during left heart catheterization for radial vs. femoral access.
Coronary access
Left heart catheterization
Percutaneous coronary intervention
Right heart catheterization
Ventriculography
Journal
Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions
ISSN: 1878-0938
Titre abrégé: Cardiovasc Revasc Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101238551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Apr 2024
15 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
13
04
2024
accepted:
13
04
2024
medline:
28
4
2024
pubmed:
28
4
2024
entrez:
27
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Radial artery access has been used for left heart catheterization (LHC) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for over 30 years. This method has gained popularity among operators due to superficial vessel anatomy, allowing for easy accessibility and compressibility, resulting in effective hemostasis. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent PCI due to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), and chest pain (stable angina) from November 2013 to February 2023. We analyzed validated registries and found 7714 PCIs. Of these, 1230 were STEMI patients, 5585 were NSTE-ACS patients, and 899 were stable angina patients, forming the basis of our final analysis. In STEMI patients, there was a trend toward a higher rate of ventriculography with femoral access compared to radial access (53.4 % vs. 47.5 %, p = 0.06), which was also observed in NSTE-ACS patients (34.2 % vs. 31.8 %, p = 0.07). The use of central venous access was more common with femoral access in all three diagnoses, with significantly higher rates seen in STEMI patients (36.2 % vs. 7.6 %, p < 0.001), NSTE-ACS patients (19.3 % vs. 2.8 %, p < 0.001), and chest pain patients (26.4 % vs. 2.7 %, p < 0.001). The analysis revealed that operators may perform fewer ventriculography and RHC procedures when using radial access as compared to femoral access. While there is discrepancy in performing left ventriculography and RHC when using a radial artery, it is essential to emphasize that routinely performing ventriculography and hemodynamic assessment has not proven to impact outcomes, despite their contributions to proper decision-making and treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Radial artery access has been used for left heart catheterization (LHC) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for over 30 years. This method has gained popularity among operators due to superficial vessel anatomy, allowing for easy accessibility and compressibility, resulting in effective hemostasis.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent PCI due to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), and chest pain (stable angina) from November 2013 to February 2023.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We analyzed validated registries and found 7714 PCIs. Of these, 1230 were STEMI patients, 5585 were NSTE-ACS patients, and 899 were stable angina patients, forming the basis of our final analysis. In STEMI patients, there was a trend toward a higher rate of ventriculography with femoral access compared to radial access (53.4 % vs. 47.5 %, p = 0.06), which was also observed in NSTE-ACS patients (34.2 % vs. 31.8 %, p = 0.07). The use of central venous access was more common with femoral access in all three diagnoses, with significantly higher rates seen in STEMI patients (36.2 % vs. 7.6 %, p < 0.001), NSTE-ACS patients (19.3 % vs. 2.8 %, p < 0.001), and chest pain patients (26.4 % vs. 2.7 %, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis revealed that operators may perform fewer ventriculography and RHC procedures when using radial access as compared to femoral access. While there is discrepancy in performing left ventriculography and RHC when using a radial artery, it is essential to emphasize that routinely performing ventriculography and hemodynamic assessment has not proven to impact outcomes, despite their contributions to proper decision-making and treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38677895
pii: S1553-8389(24)00173-8
doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2024.04.021
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Letter
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Brian C. Case – Speaker: Asahi Intecc USA, Zoll Medical. Ron Waksman – Advisory Board: Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips IGT, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Consultant: Abbott Vascular, Append Medical, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, JC Medical, MedAlliance/Cordis, Medtronic, Philips IGT, Pi-Cardia Ltd., Swiss Interventional/SIS Medical AG, Transmural Systems Inc.; Institutional Grant Support: Biotronik, Medtronic, Philips IGT; Investor: Transmural Systems Inc. All other authors – None.