Transradial approach for carotid artery stenting: A position paper from the Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (SICI-GISE)

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Transradial Access for Carotid Artery Stenting

There is an increasing number of studies on the transradial approach (TRA) for carotid artery stenting. We aimed to summarize the published data on TRA vs the transfemoral approach (TFA). We searched Science Direct, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases for the relevant literature. Primary outcomes included surgical success and cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complication rates; secondary outcomes included the rates of vascular access-related and other complications. We also compared the crossover rate, success rate, and complications between TRA and TFA carotid stenting. This is the first such meta-analysis regarding TRA and TFA. Twenty studies on TRA carotid stenting were included (n = 1300). Among 19 studies, the success rate of TRA carotid stenting was .951 (95% confidence interval [CI]: .926-.975); death rate was .022 (.011-.032); stroke rate was .005 (.001-.008); radial artery occlusion rate was .008 (.003-.013); and forearm hematoma rate was .003 (-.000 to .006). Among 4 studies comparing TRA and TFA, the success rate was lower (odds ratio: .02; 95% CI: .00-.23) and crossover rate was higher (odds ratio: 40.16; 95% CI: 4.41-365.73) with TRA. Thus, transradial neuro-interventional surgery has a lower success rate than TFA.

Embolic protection devices for carotid artery stenting: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an alternative treatment option for patients at high risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) but has been correlated with increased risk for distal embolization and periprocedural stroke despite the use of adjunctive embolic protection devices (EPD). This study compared four types of EPDs and their intra and periprocedural related complications.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed/Medline to identify studies that investigated the outcomes of CAS with adjuvant use of EPDs, including Proximal Balloon (PB), Distal Filter (DF), and Distal Balloon (DB) strategy. Continuous flow reversal performed via transcarotid approach by a commercially available device as an embolic protection strategy was intentionally excluded based on its distinct procedural characteristics and lack of availability outside of the United States. This network meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 45 studies, consisting of 7600 participants satisfied the predetermined search criteria and were included in this network meta-analysis. Overall, 13 studies provided data regarding the number of patients with new ischemic lesions detected in the DW-MRI. DF (OR: 3.15; 95% CI: 1.54-6.44; p = 0.002) and DB (OR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.58-3.29; p < 0.001) were associated with higher odds of new ischemic lesions compared to PB on DW-MRI imaging. No statistical difference was identified between DB versus DF groups (OR: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.73-2.59; p = 0.317). 36 and 27 studies reported on periprocedural stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) rates, respectively, showing similar odds of neurologic adverse events between all three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PB deployment during CAS is superior to DF and DB in preventing distal embolization phenomena. However, no statistically significant difference in TIA and stroke rate was found among any of the analyzed EPD groups. Further research is warranted to investigate the association of embolic phenomena on imaging after CAS with clinically significant neurologic deficits.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Radial or Femoral Access for Carotid Stenting

PURPOSE

There is a growing interest in performing coronary artery and neurovascular interventions via the radial artery; however, few studies have examined the outcomes of transradial carotid stenting. Therefore, our study aimed to compare cerebrovascular outcomes and crossover rates in carotid stenting between transradial and traditional transfemoral approaches.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching three electronic databases from inception to June 2022 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. In addition, random effect meta-analysis was used to pool the odds ratios (ORs) for stroke, transient ischemic attack, major adverse cardiac events, death, major vascular access site complications, and procedure crossover rates between the transradial and transfemoral approaches.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies were included involving a total of n = 567 transradial and n = 6176 transfemoral procedures. The ORs for stroke, transient ischemic attack, and major adverse cardiac events were 1.43 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.72-2.86, I2 = 0), 0.51 (95% CI 0.17-1.54, I2 = 0), and 1.08 (95% CI 0.62-1.86, I2 = 0), respectively. Neither the major vascular access site complication rate (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.32-3.87, I2 = 0) nor crossover rate (OR 3.94, 95% CI 0.62-25.11, I2 = 57%) showed statistically significant differences between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION

The modest quality of the data suggested comparable procedural outcomes between the transradial and transfemoral approaches when performing carotid stenting; however, high level evidence regarding postoperative brain images and risk of stroke in transradial carotid stenting are lacking. Therefore, it is reasonable for interventionists to weigh up the risks of neurological events and potential benefits, including fewer access site complications, before choosing the radial or femoral arteries as access sites. Future large-scale randomized controlled trials are imperative.

Transradial artery access for carotid artery stenting: A pooled analysis

INTRODUCTION

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) through transradial access (TRA) is emerging as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy. However, the current evidence base is limited, mainly comprising single-center studies.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess the safety and effectiveness of TRA for CAS, providing evidence to support clinical decisions.

METHODS

We conducted searches on PUBMED, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases, including studies on TRA for CAS. Studies with fewer than 20 patients, non-primary outcomes, and non-full-text articles were excluded.

RESULTS

We analyzed 14 studies involving 1,166 patients who underwent CAS via TRA. Procedural success rate was high in 13 studies, with a 95% rate (95% CI; 92%-98%). Crossover to TFA access was observed in 12 studies at 6% (95% CI: 3%-9%). Transradial access failure was reported in four studies, with a rate of 0% (95% CI: 0%-0%). Cannulation failure resulted in a rate of 4% (95% CI: 2%-7%). Asymptomatic radial artery occlusion (ARAO) occurred at a rate of 2% based on eight studies (95% CI: 0%-5%). Forearm hematoma was reported in 10 studies, with an occurrence of 1% (95% CI: 0%-2%). Cerebral vascular attacks (CAV) within 30 days were assessed in 13 studies, indicating a 2% occurrence (95% CI: 1%-2%).

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that TRA for CAS yields promising outcomes with high success rates and low complication rates. Further research should focus on randomized controlled trials and long-term outcomes to validate and extend findings.

The 'Trawl Fishing' Technique: A Quick Engagement of the Left Common Carotid Artery With the Simmons Catheter During Carotid Artery Stenting From the Right Radial Approach

BACKGROUND

Transradial approach for carotid artery stenting (TRCAS) is an established technique in specific anatomies potentially associated with high periprocedural event rate from femoral catheterization. The engagement of left common carotid artery originating from the aortic arch is the most challenging scenario requiring specific catheters and techniques.

METHODS

Among 542 consecutive TRCAS 66 had left, non-bovine carotid stenosis as the target vessel. We retrospectively compared the feasibility, safety, efficacy, fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure of two different techniques, the standard (ST) and the 'trawl-fishing' (TFT), to engage the LCCA with the 5F, 125 cm-long Simmons-2 catheter.

RESULTS

The ST was initially used in 20 patients with a technical success of 85 % (17/20). In the following 46 patients, the TFT was successfully tested first as bailout after ST failure in 12 cases and as first option in the remaining 34 patients. Full technical success was obtained in all patients at the first attempt. No MACCEs or vascular complications occurred in all patients. Fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure were significantly lower with the TFT vs. ST (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TFT represents a definite improvement in the technique of LCCA engagement during TRCAS.

Transradial access with Simmons guiding catheter for carotid artery stenting: Feasibility and procedural complications in a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing number of transradial approach (TRA) for carotid artery stenting (CAS), however, similar techniques and materials as for femoral access are used. We report the results of TRA lower profile technique for CAS using a 7 F Simmons guiding catheter, especially in terms of feasibility and procedural safety in a single center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 68 consecutive patients with symptomatic extracranial carotid stenoses who underwent 75 CAS between January 2018 and December 2021. The success and crossover rate, procedural time, fluoroscopy, clinical outcomes, technical considerations, and procedural complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

TRA CAS with Simmons guiding catheter was successful in 67/75 (89.3%) cases, with a 7 (9.3%) crossover rate. Fluoroscopy mean time was 15.8 minutes. Two forearm hematomas were described. No ischemic or surgical site complications were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience frontline TRA with a 7 F Simmons guiding catheter is feasible with high procedural success and a low rate of access site complications.

Proximal versus distal protection: dissecting clinical trials

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a valid alternative to conventional carotid endarterectomy for treatment of carotid artery stenosis. Distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris causing cerebrovascular accidents during CAS has been the most significant concern limiting widespread application of CAS technology. A variety of embolic protection devices (EPDs) with different mechanism of action, have been designed to minimize the risk of major embolization causing stroke and their use is recommended by current guidelines. Two general types of EPDs are available: proximal protection devices (PPDs) and distal protection devices (DPDs). However, there is no convincing clinical evidence of the clinical superiority of one device over another. This review will examine the different types of available devices and also innovative devices and techniques, including strengths and weaknesses of each, and present the available evidence and rationale for their routine use during CAS.

Transradial/brachial carotid artery stenting with proximal protection: technical instructions, acute results and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of transradial/brachial (TR/TB) carotid artery stenting (CAS) with proximal cerebral protection (PCP) as a first line of treatment of carotid artery stenosis.

METHODS

Among 556 patients with significant (>50% if symptomatic or >70% if asymptomatic by Doppler US) unilateral, lipid-rich carotid artery stenosis undergoing TR/TB CAS, 137 (24.5%) deemed at high-risk for periprocedural cerebral embolization were scheduled for PCP with Mo.MA Ultra or Mo.MA mono-balloon. In patients with very complex anatomy the standard technique was modified loading the Mo.MA catheter without mandrel on two-wire system (so called 'No MAndrel 2 wire' technique, No.MA2) to increase support and deliverability. Device, technical and procedural successes both acute and at follow-up were the main outcomes.

RESULTS

Mean patients' age was 74±7 years (93% male), 15% were symptomatic and 59.6% owned 'high-surgical-risk' features. Stenosis degree was 85±7% with soft composition in all (by CT-angiography). TR and TB approach were selected in 92 (67%) and 45 (33%) patients, respectively. Target carotid axes were right, left bovine and left non bovine in 55%, 38% and 7% of patients. Procedures were successfully completed in all patients (intention-to-treat basis) with the standard Mo.MA Ultra system in 129 patients and the Mo.MA mono-balloon in 8 patients. No.MA2 technique was succesfully used in 16 patients as 'bailout' and in 27 patients as 'first line'). Device and technical success was 97% (133/137 patients) due to crossover to femoral access in 3 cases, and Mo.MA too short to engage the ECA in 1 patient. The procedural success was 96.7% (131/137, two minor strokes). Procedural time and fluoroscopy time were increased with No.MA2 technique. One major vascular complication occurred, in the TB group, while chronic radial occlusion was detected by Doppler ultrasound in 7/92 patients (7.1%) at 372±163 days of follow-up. The event-free survival was 91% and the stroke rate was 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

TR/TB CAS with proximal protection is a feasible, safe and effective strategy and may be considered a first line strategy in all comer patients.