AbstractBACKGROUNDDespite several studies analyzing the safety of transradial access (TRA) for neurointervention compared to transfemoral approach (TFA), neurointerventionalists are apprehensive about implementing TRA. From our positive institutional experience, we now utilize TRA first line for a majority of our cases. Here, we present our single-institution experience.OBJECTIVETo determine safety and feasibility of TRA for neurointervention.METHODSThrough retrospective review of patients receiving TRA for anterior and posterior circulation cerebrovascular interventions at our institution between December 2015 and January 2018, we present our experience regarding this transition, while focusing on technique, complications, feasibility, indications, and limitations.RESULTSOne hundred five procedures were performed on 92 patients (anterior circulation: 77%; posterior circulation: 23%). Radial artery access was achieved in all patients. Twenty-nine cases constituted mechanical thrombectomy, 33 cases represented intracranial aneurysms treatments, and 33 cases included interventions like angioplasty, balloon test occlusion, chemotherapy delivery, and thrombolysis. TRA was used as second-line access to TFA in 5 instances due to aortic arch anomalies and atherosclerotic disease. Minor access-site complications were seen in 2.85% of patients. Ten procedures (9.0%) could not be completed with TRA, with crossover to TFA occurring in 7 cases.CONCLUSIONTRA is safe and feasible for the majority of neurointerventional procedures and provides decreased risk of major access-site complications compared to TFA. Perceived limitations of TRA can likely be eliminated via operator experience and engineering ingenuity; thus, there is a role for TRA for neurointervention, especially in patients with increased risk of access-site complications from TFA.
TCTAP A-054 Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Nonagenarians: A Single Operator Experience
