Feasibility and Safety of the Distal Transradial Artery for Coronary Diagnostic or Interventional Catheterization

Yaowang Lin; Xin Sun; Ruimian Chen; Huadong Liu; Xinli Pang; Jie Chen; Shaohong Dong

doi:10.1155/2020/4794838

Feasibility and Safety of the Distal Transradial Artery for Coronary Diagnostic or Interventional Catheterization

J Interv Cardiol. 2020 Dec 9:2020:4794838. doi: 10.1155/2020/4794838. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Yaowang Lin^{1

2}, Xin Sun^{1

2}, Ruimian Chen^{1

2}, Huadong Liu^{1

2}, Xinli Pang^{1

2}, Jie Chen^{1

2}, Shaohong Dong^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Cardiology, Shenzhen Cardiovascular Minimally Invasive Medical Engineering Technology Research and Development Center, Shenzhen People's Hospital, The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
² The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518020, Guangdong, China.

Abstract

Background: This prospective study compared the success rate and safety of a distal transradial artery (dTRA) approach to that of the conventional transradial artery (TRA) for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention.

Methods: From January 2019 to April 2020, nine hundred consecutive patients (height < 190 cm) scheduled for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary interventions were randomly and equally assigned to receive either dTRA or conventional TRA catheterization.

Results: Successful access was achieved in 96.00% and 96.67% of the dTRA and conventional TRA groups, respectively (P=0.814). Compared with the TRA group, patients in the dTRA experienced significantly less hemostatic band removal time (150.5 ± 50.5 cf. 210.6 ± 60.5 min, P=0.032); minor bleeding of the access site (2.44% cf. 6.44%, P=0.038); hemostatic band cost (USD; 0.1 cf. 59.4, P=0); and postprocedural radial artery occlusion (1.56% cf. 3.78%, P=0.035). A lower body mass index was a higher risk factor for dTRA access failure (odds ratio = 0.79, P=0.024), with a cutoff of 22.04 kg/m².

Conclusion: Compared to conventional TRA, dTRA had a comparable high success rate, with fewer associated complications. Clinicians should use the dTRA with caution in patients with low body mass index.

Publication types

Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

Arterial Occlusive Diseases* / etiology
Arterial Occlusive Diseases* / prevention & control
Cardiac Catheterization* / adverse effects
Cardiac Catheterization* / methods
Catheterization, Peripheral* / adverse effects
Catheterization, Peripheral* / methods
Coronary Angiography* / adverse effects
Coronary Angiography* / methods
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention* / adverse effects
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention* / methods
Postoperative Complications* / diagnosis
Postoperative Complications* / etiology
Postoperative Complications* / prevention & control
Radial Artery / surgery*
Risk Factors
Thinness / epidemiology