Retrograde Recanalization of Occluded Radial Artery: A Single-Centre Experience and Literature Review

Purpose: Radial artery occlusion (RAO) is one of the common complications after coronary intervention via the conventional radial artery approach. The purpose of the study was to explore the safety and feasibility of retrograde recanalization of the occluded radial artery via a distal radial artery (DRA) approach. Methods: Combined with the practice of our centre and a literature review, we summarized the procedure of retrograde recanalization of RAO, success rate, and complications. Results: A total of 14 of 15 patients with 15 pieces of occluded radial arteries were successfully recanalized via the DRA in our centre. In the 15 occluded vessels, 11 vessels (73.3%) had total occlusion and 4 vessels (26.7%) had functional occlusion. Four of 15 occluded vessels were acute occlusions. Two acute RAOs were only treated with aspiration via sheath, 11 RAOs with balloon angioplasty, and 2 RAOs with both, respectively. In 6 patients, cardiac catheterization was carried out via the DRA after recanalizing the RAO. A total of 10 studies reporting the results of recanalization of RAO via the DRA were systematically retrieved in the present study. In 3 case series, the number of cases was more than 5, and the success rate of recanalization was more than 85.7%. Two studies reported complications, including dissection in one case, hematoma in 2 cases, and pain in the forearm during angioplasty. Conclusions: Recanalization of the occluded radial artery via the DRA was safe and effective. When repeat cardiac catheterization was required, recanalization of the RAO and subsequent coronary angiography or intervention through the ipsilateral radial artery approach was feasible.

Invasive hemodynamic assessment of patients with cardiomyopathies

Invasive hemodynamic assessment of cardiac diseases has become an important diagnostic tool in recent decades. Non-invasive methods are the main techniques used to assess cardiac function, due to their wider availability. Cardiac catheterization is useful when there are diagnostic problems that cannot be solved with routine methods. Cardiac catheterization should be individualized according to the specific problems of the patient and based on the results from non-invasive methods. Invasive diagnostics is used in the assessment of patients with various cardiovascular diseases, including cardiomyopathies. In this review, we consider the role of cardiac catheterization, its advantages and disadvantages as part of the overall assessment of patients with cardiomyopathies.  

Procedural Risk in Congenital Cardiac Catheterization (PREDIC 3 T)

Background Advancements in the field, including novel procedures and multiple interventions, require an updated approach to accurately assess patient risk. This study aims to modernize patient hemodynamic and procedural risk classification through the creation of risk assessment tools to be used in congenital cardiac catheterization. Methods and Results Data were collected for all cases performed at sites participating in the C3PO (Congenital Cardiac Catheterization Project on Outcomes) multicenter registry. Between January 2014 and December 2017, 23 119 cases were recorded in 13 participating institutions, of which 88% of patients were <18 years of age and 25% <1 year of age; a high‐severity adverse event occurred in 1193 (5.2%). Case types were defined by procedure(s) performed and grouped on the basis of association with the outcome, high‐severity adverse event. Thirty‐four unique case types were determined and stratified into 6 risk categories. Six hemodynamic indicator variables were empirically assessed, and a novel hemodynamic vulnerability score was determined by the frequency of high‐severity adverse events. In a multivariable model, case‐type risk category (odds ratios for category: 0=0.46, 1=1.00, 2=1.40, 3=2.68, 4=3.64, and 5=5.25; all P ≤0.005) and hemodynamic vulnerability score (odds ratio for score: 0=1.00, 1=1.27, 2=1.89, and ≥3=2.03; all P ≤0.006) remained independent predictors of patient risk. Conclusions These case‐type risk categories and the weighted hemodynamic vulnerability score both serve as independent predictors of patient risk for high‐severity adverse events. This contemporary procedure‐type risk metric and weighted hemodynamic vulnerability score will improve our understanding of patient and procedural outcomes.