A preliminary analysis of a prospective multicenter randomized controlled study of the efficacy and safety on traditional and distal radial access in interventional cardiology

Abstract

Background: Despite the obvious advantages of transradial access and its widespread use, there are technical problems that force interventional surgeons to improve the methods of endovascular interventions. Aims: to analyze the effectiveness and safety of distal and traditional radial access for endovascular interventions. Methods: The study included 282 patients who underwent an endovascular intervention with distal radial access (DRA, 139 patients) or traditional radial access (TRA, 143 patients). The study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04211584. Results: The median diameter of the radial artery in its proximal part, i.e. at the site of TRA, was 2.5 mm [Q1; Q3: 2.27; 2.8], in the DRA group the median was 2.28 mm [Q1; Q3: 2.06; 3.56], p <0.0001. We noted statistically significant differences in the duration of puncture (p=0.0215), but not in the duration of the introducer insertion, catheterization of the coronary artery, fluoroscopy, the total time of intervention, the dose of ionizing radiation. In total, 28 complications developed (9.9% of 282): 14 in each of the groups in one year after the intervention. Two (0.7% of 282) patients developed bleeding [1 (0.7% of 139) — DRA, 1 (0.7% of 143) — TRA], 5 (1.8% of 282) — radial artery dissection [2 (1.4% of 139) — DRA, 3 (2.1% of 143) — TRA], 9 (3.2% of 282) — puncture failure [7 (5% of 139) — DRA, 2 (1.4% of 143) — TRA], 4 (1.4% of 282) — radial artery perforation [2 (1.4% of 139) — DRA, 2 (1.4% of 143) — TRA], 7 (2.5% of 282) — hematoma more than 5 cm [2 (1.4% of 139) — DRA, 5 (3.5% of 143) — TRA], 1 (0.4% of 282) — radial artery thrombosis [(0.7% of 143) TRA]. The risk of complications did not depend on the type of access. Conclusions: Distal and traditional radial access do not differ in their efficiency and safety. At the same time, we noted a certain tendency to a longer puncture of the radial artery with distal radial access compared to the traditional one, which is due to the smaller diameter of the radial artery.

Keywords

vascular access / distal radial access / endovascular intervention

References

[1] Коротких А.В., Бабунашвили А.М. Дистальный лучевой доступ — современные тенденции // Эндоваскулярная хирургия. 2021. Т. 8, № 2. C. 135–143. [Korotkikh AV, Babunashvili AM. Distal radial access — current trends. Endovascular Sur. 2021; 8(2):135–143. (In Russ).]

[2] Liontou C, Kontopodis E, Oikonomidis N, et al. Distal radial access: a review article. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020; 21(3):412–416. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2019.06.003

[3] Nikolakopoulos I, Vemmou E, Brilakis ES. Distal radial access for cardiac catheterization: when and how. Hellenic J Cardiol. 2020;61(2):110–111. doi: 10.1016/j.hjc.2020.06.001

[4] Corcos T. Distal radial access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: a state-of-the-art review. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(4):639–644. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28016

[5] Parikh A, Jia KQ, Lall SK, et al. Distal radial and ulnar arteries: the alternative forearm access. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2020;22(1):1. doi: 10.1007/s11936-020-0801-9

[6] Nairoukh Z, Jahangir S, Adjepong D, Malik BH. Distal radial artery access: the future of cardiovascular intervention. Cureus. 2020;12(3):e7201. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7201

[7] Hoffman H, Jalal MS, Masoud HE, et al. Distal transradial access for diagnostic cerebral angiography and neurointervention: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Neuroradiol. 2021;42(5):888–895. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A7074

[8] Robson AJ, See MS, Ellis H. Applied anatomy of the superficial branch of the radial nerve. Clin Anat. 2008;21(1):38–45. doi: 10.1002/ca.20576

[9] Каледин А.Л., Кочанов И.Н., Подметин П.С., и др. Дистальный отдел лучевой артерии при эндоваскулярных вмешательствах // Эндоваскулярная хирургия. 2017. № 2. С. 125–133. [Kaledin AL, Kochanov IN, Podmetin PS, et al. Distal part of the radial artery in endovascular interventions. Endovascular Sur. 2017;(2):125–133 (In Russ).]

[10] Shah RM, Patel D, Abbate A, et al. Comparison of transradial coronary procedures via right radial versus left radial artery approach: a meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 88:1027–1033. doi: 10.1002/ccd.26519

[11] Soydan E, Akın M. Coronary angiography using the left distal radial approach — an alternative site to conventional radial coronary angiography. Anatol J Cardiol. 2018;19(4):243–248. doi: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2018.59932

[12] Amin MR, Banerjee SK, Biswas E, et al. Feasibility and safety of distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography and intervention. Mymensingh Med J. 2019;28(3):647–654.

[13] Salles JB, Cortés L, Costa F, Vieira M. Distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography and aortography. J Sciaeon. 2017. Available from: https://www.sciaeon.org/index.php?/articles/Distal-Transradial-Access-in-the-Anatomical-Snuffbox-for-Coronary-Angiography-and-Aortography.pdf. Accessed: 15.02.2022.

[14] Kiemeneij F, Fraser D, Slagboom T, et al. Hydrophilic coating aids radial sheath withdrawal and reduces patient discomfort following transradial coronary intervention: a randomized double-blind comparison of coated and uncoated sheaths. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003;59:161–164. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10444

[15] Davies RE, Gilchrist IC. Back hand approach to radial access: the snuff box approach. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018;19(3 Pt B): 324–326. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2017.08.014

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Kartashov D.S., Babunashvili A.M., Shumakov D.V., Korotkikh A.V., Kaledin A.L., Derkach V.V., Portnov R.M., Ahramovich R.V., Zulkarnaev A.B.