The use of radial access decreases the risk of vascular access-site-related complications at a patient level but is associated with an increased risk at a population level: the radial paradox

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 531-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Azzalini ◽  
E. Marc Jolicoeur
Keyword(s):  
Vascular Access ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Access Site ◽  
Patient Level ◽  
Radial Access ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract P541: Avoiding the Radial Paradox: Radial Adoption is Not Associated With Worse Femoral Outcomes in Neuroendovascular Cases

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Andrew Wilkinson ◽  
Neil Majmundar ◽  
Joshua Catapano ◽  
Tyler Cole ◽  
Jacob Baranoski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Access Site ◽  
Patient Level ◽  
Transradial Access ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Historical Controls

Background and Purpose: Transradial access (TRA) for neuroendovascular procedures is increasing in prevalence, although numerous procedures are still performed using transfemoral access (TFA). Some cardiology studies have suggested the safety benefits of TRA at a patient level may be offset at a population level by a paradoxical increase in TFA vascular access site complications (VASCs) associated with radial adoption, the so-called “radial paradox.” We studied the effect of TRA adoption on TFA performance and VASC rates in neuroendovascular procedures. Methods: Data were collected for all neuroendovascular procedures performed over a 10-month period by trainees after implementation of a radial-first paradigm at a single center. Results: Over the study period, 1,084 procedures were performed, including 689 (63.6%) via TRA and 395 (36.4%) via TFA. In comparison to TRA, TFA cases were performed in older patients (TFA 63 ±15 vs. TRA 56 ±16), were predominantly male (TFA 52.9% vs. TRA 38.6%), used larger sheath sizes (≥7 French, TFA 56.6% vs. TRA 2.3%), were more often emergent (TFA 37.7% vs. TRA 1.1%), and used tPA administration (TFA 15.3% vs. TRA 0%) (p<.001 for all comparisons). Overall, 29 VASCs occurred (2.7%), including 27 minor (TFA 4.6% [18/395] vs. TRA 1.3% [9/689], p=.002) and 2 major (TFA 0.3% [1/395] vs. TRA 0.1% [1/689], p>.99) complications. After multivariate analysis, independent predictors of any VASC included TFA (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.4) and use of dual antiplatelets (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.6—11.1). Conclusions: TFA remains an essential route for neuroendovascular procedures, accounting for 36.4% of cases under a radial-first paradigm. TFA is disproportionately performed in patients undergoing procedures with an increased-risk for VASCs, though the minor and major VASC rates are comparable to historical controls. TFA proficiency may still be achieved in radial-first training without an increase in femoral complications.

Abstract 374: Trans-radial Access Angiography Learning Curve

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Chan ◽  
Rosanna Tavella ◽  
John F Beltrame ◽  
Matthew Worthley ◽  
Sivabaskari Pasupathy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Angiography ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Radial Artery ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Femoral Access ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Radial Access ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Radial Operators

Introduction: Radial artery access has been adopted widely around the world as standard best practice for coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. Radial artery access offers benefits in regard to reduced major bleeding, reduced hospital stay, fewer vascular complications, similar procedural times, patient preference and a mortality benefit in acute coronary syndrome/STEMI management. Despite transradial access being best practice, there has been a slow uptake of this technique amongst some cardiologists/interventionalists, particularly in the USA. This may partially be attributed to uncertainties regarding the learning curve and concerns regarding delaying treatment in STEMI if radial access fails. Methods: Using the data from the Coronary Angiography Database Of South Australia registry (CADOSA), we sought to determine the radial access failure rates for acute cases during transition from routine femoral access to routine radial access from 2012 to 2016, a period when the greatest transition in practice occurred. Data regarding initial vascular access, success or failure, and subsequent vascular access was prospectively recorded for all cases. Operators with at least a 70% rate of initial radial access were deemed to be established radial operators and acted as controls for operators transitioning from femoral access (at least 70% of cases) to radial access during the study period. Cases were further classified as elective, urgent (eg inpatient ACS) or emergency (eg STEMI). Results: There were 23 operators with sufficient volumes, responsible for 20,073 cath lab visits during the 5 year period studied. The overall radial access rate increased from 57% in 2012 to 78% in 2016. For operators transitioning from a default femoral access (76% of case) to a default radial access (75% of cases), the radial access failure rate for urgent and emergency cases was 3.7%, compared to 3.5% for experienced radial operators over the same period. Conclusion: Despite strong evidence of benefit for radial access angiography and intervention, compared to femoral access, some operators remain reluctant to transition. Utilising the CADOSA database, we observed a safe transition from femoral to radial access without an increased risk of access site failure for acute cases. Transition from femoral to radial access can be made safely by a range of clinicians managing acute cases.

scholarly journals Dialysis access as a source of infective endocarditis in dialysis patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hee D. Jeon ◽  
Kevin B. Lo ◽  
Eduardo E. Quintero ◽  
Byeori Lee ◽  
Asma Gulab ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Bacterial Invasion ◽  
Dialysis Access ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
Access Site ◽  
Source Of Infection ◽  
Duke Criteria ◽  
Increased Risk

The incidence of Infective Endocarditis (IE) is higher in dialysis patients compared to the general population. A major risk factor for IE in this group stems from bacterial invasion during repeated vascular access. Previous studies have shown increased risk of bacteremia in patients with indwelling dialysis catheters compared to permanent vascular access. However, association between the development of IE and the type of dialysis access is unclear. We aimed to examine the associated types of intravascular access and route of infection in dialysis patients who were admitted with infective endocarditis at our center. All patients admitted to Albert Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia with a diagnosis of infective endocarditis who were on chronic hemodialysis were identified from the hospital database for the period of 1/1/07 to 12/31/18. Modified Duke criteria was used to confirm the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. A total of 96 cases were identified. Of those, 57 patients had an indwelling dialysis catheter while the other 39 had permanent dialysis access. In 82% of patients with dialysis catheters, their dialysis access site was identified as the primary source of infection compared to 30% in those with permanent dialysis access (p<0.001). The number of dialysis catheters placed in the preceding 6 months was strongly associated with endocarditis resulting from the dialysis access site (OR = 3.202, p=0.025). Dialysis catheters are more likely to serve as the source of infection in dialysis patients developing IE compared to permanent dialysis access. Increased awareness of risk of IE associated with dialysis catheters is warranted.

scholarly journals Cardiogenic shock and radial access in patients with an acute ST elevation myocardial infarction

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Zahn ◽  
M Hochadel ◽  
B Schumacher ◽  
M Pauschinger ◽  
C Stellbrink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
St Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Strong Variation ◽  
Access Site ◽  
Femoral Access ◽  
Radial Access ◽  
St Elevation ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Background Cardiogenic shock (CS) in patients (pts) with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is the strongest predictor of hospital mortality. Radial in contrast to femoral access in STEMI pts might be associated with a lower mortality. However, little is known on radial access in CS pts. Methods We retrospectively analysed all STEMI pts between 2009 and 2015 who sufferend from CS and who were included into the ALKK PCI registry. Pts treated via a radial access were compared to those treated via a femoral access. Results Between 2009 and 2015 23796 STEMI pts were included in the registry. 1763 (7.4%) of pts were in CS. The proportion of radial access was 6.6%: in 2009 4.0% and in 2015 19.6%, p for trend &lt;0.0001 with a strong variation between the participating centres (0% to 37%). Conclusions Radial access was only used in 6.6% of STEMI pts presenting in CS. However, a significant increase in the use of radial access was observed over time (2009: 4%, 2015 19.6%, p&lt;0.001), with a great variance in its use between the participating hospitals. Despite similar pt characteristics the difference in hospital mortality according to access site has to be interpretated with caution. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Age is just a number: Is frailty being ignored in vascular access planning for dialysis?

2021 ◽  
pp. 112972982198990
Author(s):  
Kulli Kuningas ◽  
Nicholas Inston
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Clinical Condition ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Dialysis Access ◽  
Adverse Health Outcomes ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
First Choice

Current international guidelines advocate fistula creation as first choice for vascular access in haemodialysis patients, however, there have been suggestions that in certain groups of patients, in particular the elderly, a more tailored approach is needed. The prevalence of more senior individuals receiving renal replacement therapy has increased in recent years and therefore including patient age in decision making regarding choice of vascular access for dialysis has gained more relevance. However, it seems that age is being used as a surrogate for overall clinical condition and it can be proposed that frailty may be a better basis to considering when advising and counselling patients with regard to vascular access for dialysis. Frailty is a clinical condition in which the person is in a vulnerable state with reduced functional capacity and has a higher risk of adverse health outcomes when exposed to stress inducing events. Prevalence of frailty increases with age and has been associated with an increased risk of mortality, hospitalisation, disability and falls. Chronic kidney disease is associated with premature ageing and therefore patients with kidney disease are prone to be frailer irrespective of age and the risk increases further with declining kidney function. Limited data exists on the relationship between frailty and vascular access, but it appears that frailty may have an association with poorer outcomes from vascular access. However, further research is warranted. Due to complexity in decision making in dialysis access, frailty assessment could be a key element in providing patient-centred approach in planning and maintaining vascular access for dialysis.

Gendered experiences of unemployment, suicide and self-harm: a population-level record linkage study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
R. Cunningham ◽  
A. Milner ◽  
S. Gibb ◽  
V. Rijnberg ◽  
G. Disney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Employment Status ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Labour Force ◽  
Antidepressant Medication ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Data Infrastructure ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Self Harm

Abstract Background Unemployment and being not in the labour force (NILF) are risk factors for suicide, but their association with self-harm is unclear, and there is continuing debate about the role of confounding by prior mental health conditions. We examine associations between employment status and self-harm and suicide in a prospective cohort, taking into account prior mental-health-related factors. Methods We used linked data from the New Zealand Integrated Data Infrastructure. The outcomes were chosen to be hospital presentation for self-harm and death by suicide. The exposure was employment status, defined as employed, unemployed, or NILF, measured at the 2013 Census. Confounders included demographic factors and mental health history (use of antidepressant medication, use of mental health services, and prior self-harm). Logistic regression was used to model effects. Analyses were stratified by gender. Results For males, unemployment was associated with an increased risk of suicide [odds ratio (OR): 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20–1.84] and self-harm (OR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.45–1.68) after full adjustment for confounders. NILF was associated with an increased risk of self-harm (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.32–1.55), but less of an association was seen with suicide (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.94–1.49). For females, unemployment was associated with an increased risk of suicide (OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.93–1.80) and of self-harm (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.43–1.62), and NILF was associated with a similar increase in risk for suicide (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.98–1.75) and self-harm (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.26–1.40). Discussion Exclusion from employment is associated with a considerably heightened risk of suicide and self-harm for both men and women, even among those without prior mental health problems.

MO765CENTRAL VEIN STENOSES IN HD PATIENTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksei Zulkarnaev ◽  
Andrey Vatazin ◽  
Vadim Stepanov ◽  
Ekaterina Parshina ◽  
Mariya Novoseltseva
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Dwell Time ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Clinical Signs ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Important Risk Factor ◽  
Central Vein ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background and Aims The prevalence of central vein stenosis (CVS) in patients on hemodialysis (HD) is difficult to be assessed directly. This is mainly caused by the variety of clinical signs and the high frequency of asymptomatic CVS. Aim: to assess the frequency of occurrence of various CVS forms in HD patients. Method The retrospective observational study is based on the results of treatment of 1865 HD patients who underwent diagnostic and therapeutic procedures on vascular access in our center. In case of vascular access dysfunction, patients were examined according to a local protocol: ultrasound of the peripheral (to exclude lesion of peripheral AVF segments) and central veins (over the available length), followed with CT-angiography or percutaneous angiography, if necessary. Results AVF/AVG dysfunction was observed in 29.4% of patients (549 of 1865). 211 patients were diagnosed with CVS. The prevalence of CVS was 11.3% (211 of 1865) among all HD patients and 38.4% (211 of 549) in patients with AVF dysfunction. Among patients with CVS, 37% (78 of 211) had vein lesions without clinical symptoms or with minimal manifestations (a tendency to decrease KT/V). The prevalence of asymptomatic CVS was 4.2% (78 of 1865) in the general population of HD patients and 14.2% (78 of 549) in patients with AVF dysfunction. In case of asymptomatic CVS it was detected by an ultrasound examination during CVC implantation (N=38), during unsuccessful attempts to implant CVC (N=29), in the case of recurrent AVF thrombosis without underlying peripheral segments lesion (N=9) or during echocardiography (N=2). The prevalence of asymptomatic CVS among patients without AVF dysfunction was 5.9% (78 of 1316). True prevalence of subclinical CVS among HD patients without obvious signs of AVF dysfunction may vary widely. A total of 48.8% (103 of 211) of all CVS cases were treated. At the same time, in 10.7% (11 of 103) of cases, patients did not present symptoms of CVS, and surgery was performed due to recurrent AVF thrombosis without damage of the peripheral parts of AVF. Patients with clinically manifest CVS who received endovascular interventions had a significantly higher risk of AVF loss compared to patients with asymptomatic CVS: HR=2.566 [95% CI 1.706; 3.86], log rank p&lt;0.0001. However, patients with an asymptomatic CVS had a higher risk of AVF function loss compared to the general HD population (HR=2,051 [95% CI 1,243; 3,384], log rank p= 0.0004) – fig. 1. The use of CVC is a known risk factor of CVS development. We analyzed the relationship of CVS risk with multiply CVC placements and catheter dwell time using the Cox proportional hazards regression model (fig. 2). In the univariate model, a greater No of CVCs as well as longer time in place increased the risk of CVS. In the multivariate model (χ2=105.516, df=2, p&lt;0.0001), catheter dwell time was no longer associated with an increased risk of CVC, while the mean number of inserted catheters remained an important risk factor. Conclusion The prevalence of both symptomatic and asymptomatic forms of CVS in HD patients is high. Patients with vascular access dysfunction should be carefully examined to identify the asymptomatic CVS. The mean No of catheterizations is a more important risk factor of CVS than longer catheter dwell time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document