Safety and Effectiveness of Coronary Angiography or Intervention through the Distal Radial Access: A Meta-Analysis

Objectives. Searching the literature for coronary angiography (CAG) or intervention through distal radial access (DRA) and performing a meta-analysis. Background. Coronary angiography (CAG) or intervention through distal radial access (DRA) may have a similar success rate, low radial artery occlusion rate, low radial artery spasm rate, and low rate of puncture site hematoma for patients with coronary heart disease. Therefore, the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched, and the data were pooled for meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of DRA. Methods. RCTs comparing the CAG or intervention through DRA vs. transradial access (TRA) published between January 1, 2017, and May 4, 2021, were searched in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The endpoints included the rate of access success and the number of radial artery occlusions, radial artery spasms, and puncture site hematomas. The data were extracted, and a random-effects model was used for analysis. Results. Among 204 studies, 6 RCTs (with 2825 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Compared to TRA, the access success rate in DRA ( p = 0.1 ) and the lower rate of puncture site hematoma were not significantly different ( p = 0.646 ), while the radial artery occlusion rate ( p < 0.001 ) and radial artery spasm rate ( p = 0.029 ) were significantly lower. Conclusion. In summary, DRA has a similar access success rate and incidence of hematoma at the puncture site, but a lower incidence of RAO and spasm compared to TRA. These findings demonstrated that DRA is a safe and effective access for CAG or intervention.

Analysis of radial artery occlusion causes and methods of its prevention after interventions using radial access. Results of the APRIORI study

Aim. To study predictors of radial artery occlusion (RAO) and ways to prevent it after interventions using radial access.Material and methods. The study consisted of prospective and retrospective parts. The total number of included patients was 2284. Patients undergoing interventions by radial access in various medical organizations were retrospectively considered. The prospective study included 1284 patients who were subject to interventional treatment. Patients were randomized into two groups as follows: in group 1, hemostasis was performed within 4 hours, in group 2 — >6 hours. All patients underwent a bedside Barbeau test with a pulse oximeter and an ultrasound of access arteries to determine the radial artery patency/occlusion.Results. The RAO rate in the retrospective part was 21,8%, while in the prospective one — 10,1% with long-term hemostasis and 1,4% with short-term hemostasis (p<0,001). Predictors of RAO were type 2 diabetes (odds ratio (OR), 1,9, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1,1-3,4, p=0,03) and an increase in hemostasis duration by 1 hour (OR, 1,2, 95% CI, 1,1-1,3, p<0,001). When analyzing the retrospective part, the predictors of RAO were body mass index (OR, 1,06, 95% CI, 1,02-1,09, p=0,002), female sex (OR, 0,6, 95% CI, 0,4-0,9, p=0,02), smoking (OR, 1,38, 95% CI, 1-1,91, p=0,047). The administration of statins in different dosages, as well as antihypertensive and anti-ischemic agents, did not have a significant effect on the RAO rate.Conclusion. The main predictors of RAO were type 2 diabetes, an increase in hemostasis duration, female sex, smoking, and the artery-to-introducer diameter ratio. Taking statins, anti-ischemic and antihypertensive agents does not have a protective effect on RAO rate.

Distal versus conventional transradial access for coronary angiography and intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction Distal transradial artery access (DTRA) has recently gained attention due to potential benefits in terms of local complications and risk of superficial palmar arch ischemia in case of radial artery occlusion. Purpose In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the utility of DTRA compared to conventional transradial artery access (CTRA) for coronary angiography and intervention. Method We performed a comprehensive literature search using multiple databases from inception through February 2021 for all the studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of DTRA for coronary angiography and intervention. The primary outcome of interest was access success rate. The secondary outcomes were periprocedural local complications (site hematoma, radial artery occlusion or spasm) and procedural characteristics (cannulation, fluoroscopy, and radial artery compression times). All meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effect model. Results A total of 8 studies including 1630 patients (805 underwent DTRA vs. 825 with CTRA), were included in the final analysis. Three of the included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and the remainder were observational studies. The access success rate was similar in the two groups (odds ratio (OR): 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18–2.09; P=0.43; I2=72%). Similarly, no difference was observed in the overall periprocedural local complications rate (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.38–1.04, P=0.07, I2=25%). On subgroup analysis, the rate of radial artery occlusion was significantly lower in DRTA group (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13–0.82, P=0.02, I2=0%). Regarding the procedural characteristics, the two approaches were different only in the cannulation time favoring the CTRA group (mean difference in minutes [MD] 0.96, 95% CI 0.16–1.76; P=0.02). Conclusions The DTRA represents an alternative site for radial artery access for coronary angiography and interventions, with a high success rate accompanied by a low risk of complications. Although the cannulation time was longer for the DTRA, this can potentially improve with training, practice, and utilization of ultrasound-guided punctures. The major advantage provided by the DTRA is the trend toward a lower risk of radial artery occlusion, which is frequently observed with the conventional approach. Further adequately powered RCTs are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of this approach. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Central illustration

Routine snuffbox approach do not reduce radial artery occlusion in comparison with conventional transradial access

Background/Introduction Postprocedural radial artery occlusion (RAO) is still the Achilles' heel of conventional transradial approach (cTRA) as it limits its reuse for future coronary procedures. A distal transradial access (dTRA) via the anatomical snuffbox has been proposed as an alternative. It is hypothesised that dTRA may reduce the incidence of RAO. Purpose To assess whether routine dTRA reduce the risk of RAO in consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography or intervention, in comparison with cTRA. Methods Out of 465 subjects, 400 patients were included in a prospective, single-center, randomized (1:1) study. Hemodynamic instability, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, forearm artery occlusion or prior radial access failure were the exclusion criteria. Ultrasound-guided follow-up was obtained after 1 day and 60 days to evaluate the incidence of acute and late RAO. Results Baseline characteristics of patients were matched. Results are presented in table 1. Conclusion(s) The incidence of postprocedural acute and late RAO after routine dTRA and cTRA is low and occur with similar frequency when evaluated by ultrasound. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Table 1

FREQUENCY OF RADIAL ARTERY OCCLUSION IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS CARDIAC CATHETERIZATION BY RADIAL ACCESS

Objectives: To assess the frequency of radial artery occlusion (RAO) in patients undergoing percutaneous cardiac catheterization. Methodology: A descriptive cross sectional study was carried out at cardiology department Jinnah hospital, Lahore from April – October 2018. One hundred thirty one consecutive patients who had undergone percutaneous cardiac catheterization via the trans-radial approach were enrolled in the study. Post procedure patients were followed in the ward and after 24 hours, Allen’s test was used for checking the patency of the radial artery. Color Doppler USG was performed in the patients with absent radial artery and RAO was confirmed. Data was entered and analysed in SPSS version 21.0. Results: Out of 131 patients who had undergone for percutaneous cardiac catheterization 63.4% were male and 36.6% were female. Among these cases radial artery occlusion was detected in 52 (39.7%) patients. No statistically significant difference was found with effect modifiers like age, gender, duration of procedure and type of intervention statistically insignificant difference was observed (P>0.05). Conclusion: A considerable number of patients were observed with radial artery occlusion with trans-radial approach thought statistically insignificant difference was noted among all ages, gender or type of intervention suggesting a detailed evaluation of radial artery patency should be done before hospital discharge.