Background: Transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) offers important advantages over transfemoral PCI, including better outcomes. However, when there is indication to ad hoc PCI, a 6 French workflow is a common default strategy, hence potentially influencing vascular access selection in patients with anticipated small size radial artery.
Methods: A multidimensional evaluation was performed to compare two ad hoc interventional strategies in women <160cm: a full 6 French workflow (namely 6 French introducer sheath, diagnostic catheters and guiding catheter) with a modified workflow consisting in the use of 5 French diagnostic catheters preceded by the placement of a 6 French sheath introducer and followed by a 6 French guiding catheter use for PCI.
Results: Overall 120 women (68±11years) were enrolled in the study. Coronary angiography has been performed using 5 French or 6 French diagnostic catheters in 57 (47.5%) and 63 (52.5%) cases, respectively. Radial spasm and switch to another access occurred more frequently among women who underwent coronary angiography with 6 French rather than 5 French diagnostic catheters (43% vs. 25%, p=0.03 and 2% vs. 11%, p=0.04, respectively). Total time to guidewire lesion crossing was also significantly higher when PCI has been preceded by 6 French rather than 5 French coronary angiography (23±11min vs 16±7min, p=0.013).
Conclusions: In patients with anticipated unfavorable radial access, a workflow consisting in 6 French introducer sheath placement, 5 French coronary angiography, and 6 French coronary intervention is on multiple parameters the most straightforward and effective strategy.
Keywords: Percutaneous coronary intervention; Radial artery; Transradial intervention; Unfavorable vascular access.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.