P5536Comparison of safety and effectiveness between right and left radial artery approach in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome. Propensity score analysis of data from the ORPKI

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Tokarek ◽  
A Dziewierz ◽  
K Plens ◽  
T Rakowski ◽  
D Dudek ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The use of the radial approach (RA) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has gradually increased. Several studies demonstrated that radial artery is associated with significant reduction in major adverse cardiac events for both coronary angiography and PCI in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, it is still unclear if the side of RA has influence on clinical outcomes in an all-comer population in ACS settings. Purpose We sought to evaluate safety, feasibility, and clinical outcomes of right radial approach (RRA) compared to left radial approach (LRA) during PCI in “real-world” patients with ACS. Methods A total of 234,087 consecutive patients with ACS treated with PCI and stent implantation via radial approach between 2014 and 2017 in 151 invasive cardiology centers on the Polish territory. Data was based on the ORPKI Polish National Registry. Patients treated with RRA and LRA were compared using a propensity score analysis to avoid possible selection bias. The analysis was done in an “as-treated” manner. Results Procedure was conducted using RRA and LRA in 180,378 (77.1%) and 53,709 (22.9%) patients, respectively. After propensity score matching higher total amount of contrast (174.28 (±75.56) vs. 166.95 (±70.57) [ml]; P=0.001) and radiation doses were reported in PCI with left radial artery utilization (1210.21 (±1003.53) vs. 1054.07 (±1024.17) [mGy]; p=0.001). No differences were observed between RRA and LRA in rate of periprocedural adverse events such as myocardial infarction (0.08% vs. 0.08%; p=0.9) stroke (0.02% vs. 0.01%; p=0.1), no-reflow phenomenon (0.64%vs. 0.56%; p=0.1) and death (0.25% vs. 0.24%; p=0.7). A trend towards a lower rate of access-site-related bleeding during PCI was observed in RRA group (0.08% vs. 0.05%; p=0.066). Coronary artery perforation (0.21% vs. 0.16%; p=0.05) and cardiac arrest (0.56% vs 0.42%; p=0.01) were reported more often during PCI conducted with LRA. Conclusions Both radial approaches seems to be equally effective in the setting of PCI in ACS. However, utilization of left radial artery was associated with trend toward increased risk of access-site bleeding and higher rate of periprocedural complications as compared to RRA. Higher amount of contrast and radiation doses used in LRA procedures might be equivalent of generally lower experience with this access site. Acknowledgement/Funding None

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Tokarek ◽  
A Dziewierz ◽  
K Plens ◽  
T Rakowski ◽  
M Zabojszcz ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Radial approach (RA) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with reduced mortality and access site complications. The routine use of the RA in patients should be strongly considered, keeping in mind the learning curve associated with the technique. However, promotion of RA may interfere with the equally important goal of maintaining proficiency in the femoral approach (FA), which is essential in a variety of procedures as well as when RA fails. There is possible risk of higher rate of complications in PCI with FA performed by operators mainly using radial artery as access site. Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate impact of experience and proficiency with RA for clinical outcomes on PCI via FA in “real-world” patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods A total of 539 invasive cardiologists performing PCI in 151 invasive cardiology centers on the Polish territory between 2014 and 2017 were included in study analysis. Proficiency threshold has been set at >400 procedures during four consecutive years per individual operator. They were categorized to quartiles according to total volume of radial artery utilization during all PCIs. Procedures performed on patients with Killip-Kimball class IV on admission to catheterisation laboratory were excluded from analysis. Results The most of the operators performed >75% of all procedures via radial artery (326 (60.5%)), 112 (20.8%) used RA in 50–75% of cases, 67 (12.4%) in 25–50% of all PCIs and only 34 (6.3%) invasive cardiologist were using RA in less than 25% of all procedures. Mortality during PCI via FA was higher in group of invasive cardiologist with >75% of all procedures performed with radial access (>75% vs. 50–75% vs. 25–50% vs. <25%: 1.63% (±2.52%) vs. 0.93% (±1.05%) vs. 0.68% (±0.73%) vs. 0.31% (±0.40%); p=0.01). A trend towards higher rate of bleeding at the puncture site during PCI procedures with femoral artery were reported in groups of operators with higher expertise in RA (>75% vs. 50–75% vs. 25–50% vs. <25%: 0.43% (±1.09%) vs. 0.14% (±0.36%) vs. 0.21% (±0.45%) vs. 0.14% (±0.37%); p=0.09). Conclusions Higher experience in radial access might be linked to worse outcome in PCI via FA in ACS settings. Femoral artery is important vascular approach and should not be abandoned while learning procedures with radial artery utilization. Acknowledgement/Funding None


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 2204
Author(s):  
Oh-Hyun Lee ◽  
Ji Woong Roh ◽  
Eui Im ◽  
Deok-Kyu Cho ◽  
Myung Ho Jeong ◽  
...  

Recently, the left distal radial approach (DRA) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to be a feasible option, but there are limited data regarding the feasibility of performing bifurcation PCI via the left DRA. Therefore, this study aimed to describe our experience with the contemporary left DRA to perform PCI of bifurcation lesions. Between December 2017 and December 2019, we identified 106 patients treated with bifurcation PCI via the left DRA. We evaluated the success rate of PCI, access-site complications including major bleeding requiring surgery or transfusion, hematoma, distal and forearm radial artery occlusion, and 30-day mortality. Eleven patients (10.4%) treated with left main bifurcation and true bifurcations accounted for 39.6% of cases, with the left anterior descending artery/diagonal branch being the most frequent bifurcation site (57.5%, 61/106). PCI was performed using a 6-French guiding catheter in 101 (95.3%) cases. Successful PCI for bifurcation lesions via the left DRA was achieved in all 106 patients without access-site cross-over. There was no major bleeding, distal and forearm radial artery occlusion, forearm hematoma, or mortality at 30 days. The left DRA is a safe and feasible alternative access site for bifurcation PCI in selected patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 18-28
Author(s):  
Kevin White ◽  
Judy Currey ◽  
Julie Considine

Topic Patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention are at risk of clinical deterioration that results in similar general signs and symptoms regardless of its cause. However, specific causes and forms of clinical deterioration are associated with key differences in assessment findings. Focused clinical assessments using a modified primary survey enable nurses to rapidly identify the cause and form of clinical deterioration, facilitating targeted treatment. Clinical Relevance Clinical deterioration during percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. Previous studies identified nursing inconsistencies when recognizing clinical deterioration, with inconsistent collection of cues and prioritization of cues related to cardiac performance over more sensitive indicators of clinical deterioration. Purpose of Paper To describe a framework to help nurses optimize physiological cue collection to improve recognition of clinical deterioration during periprocedural care of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for unstable acute coronary syndrome. Content Covered Literature analysis revealed 7 forms of clinical deterioration in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: coronary artery occlusion, stroke, ventricular rupture, valvular insufficiency, lethal cardiac arrhythmias, access-site and non–access-site bleeding, and anaphylaxis. Evidence for the pathophysiology, incidence, severity, and clinical features of each form of clinical deterioration is identified. A framework is proposed to help nurses conduct highly focused patient assessments, enabling prompt recognition of and response to the specific forms of clinical deterioration that occur in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document