Skip to main content
Home
Zeitschriften
Zeitungen
Podcast
Gesundheitspolitik
Praxis
Allerlei
Jobs
Fachgebiete
Allgemeinmedizin Anästhesiologie & Intensivmedizin Apotheke Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kinder & Jugendheilkunde Neurologie & Psychiatrie Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie Pflege Urologie Zahnmedizin
Subfächer Innere Medizin
Diabetologie Gastroenterologie Infektiologie Kardiologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Pneumologie Rheumatologie
Fortbildungen
Überblick Fortbildungen DFP-Literaturstudium-Artikel DFP-Webcast Fortbildungen DFP-Podcasts
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift
Erschienen in:

12.09.2017 | original article

Radial versus femoral access site for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients suffering acute myocardial infarction

A randomized prospective multicenter trial

verfasst von: Christiana Schernthaner, MD, Matthias Hammerer, MD, Stefan Harb, MD, Matthias Heigert, MD, Kurt Hoellinger, MD, Elisabeth Lassnig, Edwin Maurer, MD, Jochen Schuler, MD, Peter Siostrzonek, MD, Hanno Ulmer, MD, Andreas Winter, MD, Johann Altenberger, MD

Erschienen in: Wiener klinische Wochenschrift | Ausgabe 5-6/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Summary

Background

Transradial access (TRA) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a widely used standard technique with lower complication rates compared to transfemoral access (TFA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of TRA versus TFA for PCI on clinically significant vascular access complications in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

This multicenter study randomly assigned 250 patients in a 1:1 fashion (TRA vs. TFA) admitted with or without ST-segment elevation AMI undergoing immediate PCI. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of hematoma, pseudo-aneurysm or local bleeding at the access site requiring any further intervention and/or prolonged hospital stay. Radiation exposure to the patient and operator was also investigated.

Results

In the study cohort (N = 250 patients, mean age 62 ± 12.7 years, 76% males) 5 patients (2%) achieved the primary endpoint without a significant difference between groups, 4 out of 125 (3.2%) in the TFA group and 1 out of 125 (0.8%) in the TRA group (p = 0.17). Access site hematoma was significantly more frequent in the TFA group compared to the TRA group (24.8% vs. 8.8%, respectively; p < 0.0007). Local bleeding was only seen in the TFA group (3.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.04). Time intervals from admission to catheter laboratory to first balloon inflation were longer in the TRA compared to the TFA group (34 ± 17 min vs 29.5 ± 13 min, respectively; p = 0.018). Radiation exposure to the patient and operator was identical.

Conclusion

The use of TRA was accompanied by lower rates of access site complications; however, the need for subsequent treatment or prolonged hospital stays was not observed using either of the two access approaches.
Vorheriger Artikel Impact of age on short- and long-term mortality of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the VIENNA STEMI network
Nächster Artikel Extracellular volume quantification by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging without hematocrit sampling
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Azzalini L, Khan R, Al-Hawwas M, Hatem R, Fortier A, L’Allier PL, Ly HQ. Effect of radial-to-femoral access crossover on adverse outcomes in primarypercutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114:1165–73.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabró P, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, Zaro T, MATRIX Investigators, Investigators. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomized multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2465–76.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, Niemelä K, Xavier D, Widimsky P, RIVAL trial group, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–20. Erratum in: Lancet. 2011;378(9785):30. Lancet. 2011 ;377(9775):1408.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Mehta SR, Jolly SS, Cairns J, Niemela K, Rao SV, Cheema AN, RIVAL Investigators, et al. Effects of radial versus femoral artery access in patients with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation. J Am Collcardiol. 2012;60:2490–9.CrossRef
5.
Romagnoli E, Biondi-Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A, Politi L, Rigattieri S, Pendenza G, et al. Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2481–9.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Bernat I, Horak D, Stasek J, Mates M, Pesek J, Ostadal P. et al ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by radial or femoral approach in a multicenter randomized clinical trial: the STEMI-RADIAL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:964–72.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Chase AJ, Fretz EB, Warburton WP, Klinke WP, Carere RG, Pi D, et al. Association of the arterial access site at angioplasty with transfusion and mortality: the M.O.R.T.A.L study (Mortality benefit Of Reduced Transfusion after percutaneous coronary intervention via the Arm or Leg). Heart. 2008;94:1019–25.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Ratib K, Mamas MA, Anderson SG, Bhatia G, Routledge H, De Belder M, British Cardiovascular Intervention Society and the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, et al. Access site practice and procedural outcomes in relation to clinical presentation in 439,947 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the United Kingdom. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:20–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Valgimigli M, Saia F, Guastaroba P, Menozzi A, Magnavacchi P, Santarelli A, REAL Registry Investigators, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral intervention for acute myocardial infarction: a propensity score-adjusted and -matched analysis from the REAL (REgistroregionaleAngiopLastichedell’Emilia-Romagna) multicenter registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:23–35.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GG, de Benedictis ML, Rigattieri S, Turri M, Anselmi M, et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:349–56. Review.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Joyal D, Bertrand OF, Rinfret S, Shimony A, Eisenberg MJ. Meta-analysis of ten trials on the effectiveness of the radial versus the femoral approach in primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2012;109:813–8.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Vranckx P, Campo G, Anselmi M, Bolognese L, Colangelo S, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al. Multicenter Evaluation of Single High-Dose Bolus Tirofiban vs. Abciximab with Sirolimus-Eluting Stent or Bare Metal Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction Study. Does the site of bleeding matter? A stratified analysis on location of TIMI-graded bleedings and their impact on 12-month outcome in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:71–8.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Rao SV, Cohen MG, Kandzari DE, Bertrand OF, Gilchrist IC. The transradial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention: historical perspective, current concepts, and future directions. J Am Collcardiol. 2010;55:2187–95.CrossRef
14.
Mehran R, Pocock SJ, Nikolsky E, Clayton T, Dangas GD, Kirtane AJ, et al. A risk score to predict bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2556–66.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Bertrand OF, Patel T. Radial approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: ready for prime time? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2500–3.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Lee MS, Wolfe M, Stone GW. Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes: re-evaluation of the current body of evidence. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:1149–52.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Bradley SM, Rao SV, Curtis JP, Parzynski CS, Messenger JC, Daugherty SL, et al. Change in hospital-level use of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention and periprocedural outcomes: insights from the national cardiovascular data registry. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:550–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Stone GW, McLaurin BT, Cox DA, Bertrand ME, Lincoff AM, Moses JW, ACUITY Investigators, et al. Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2203–16.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Baker NC, Escarcega RO, Lipinski MJ, Magalhaes MA, Koifman E, Kiramijyan S, et al. Active Versus Passive Anchoring Vascular Closure Devices Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Safety and Efficacy Comparative Analysis. J Interv Cardiol. 2016;29:108–12.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Yeni H, Axel M, Örnek A, Butz T, Maagh P, Plehn G. Clinical and Subclinical Femoral Vascular Complications after Deployment of two Different Vascular Closure Devices or Manual Compression in the Setting of Coronary Intervention. Int J Med Sci. 2016;13(4):255–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Hamon M, Pristipino C, Di Mario C, Nolan J, Ludwig J, Tubaro M, European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, Working Group on Acute Cardiac Care of the European Society of Cardiology, Working Group on Thrombosis on the European Society of Cardiology, et al. Consensus document on the radial approach in percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: position paper by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Working Groups on Acute Cardiac Care** and Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology. EuroIntervention. 2013;8:1242–51.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Radial versus femoral access site for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients suffering acute myocardial infarction
A randomized prospective multicenter trial
verfasst von
Christiana Schernthaner, MD
Matthias Hammerer, MD
Stefan Harb, MD
Matthias Heigert, MD
Kurt Hoellinger, MD
Elisabeth Lassnig
Edwin Maurer, MD
Jochen Schuler, MD
Peter Siostrzonek, MD
Hanno Ulmer, MD
Andreas Winter, MD
Johann Altenberger, MD
Publikationsdatum
12.09.2017
Verlag
Springer Vienna
Erschienen in
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift / Ausgabe 5-6/2018
Print ISSN: 0043-5325
Elektronische ISSN: 1613-7671
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-017-1260-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5-6/2018

Femoral access site closure without prior femoral angiography

  • Open Access
  • original article

Extracellular volume quantification by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging without hematocrit sampling

  • Open Access
  • original article

The 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease

  • review article

Blood pressure profile is associated with microalbuminuria and retinopathy in hypertensive nondiabetic patients

  • original article

Synthetic extracellular volume fraction—state of play

  • editorial

High liver density on CT imaging due to amiodarone toxicity

  • images in clinical medicine