Best Practices for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion After Transradial Diagnostic Angiography and Intervention

Assessment of acute radial artery injury after distal transradial access for coronary intervention: an optical coherence tomography study

There is a paucity of data on acute radial artery (RA) injuries using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients undergoing coronary intervention via distal transradial coronary access (dTRA). To evaluate the incidence of acute RA injury following dTRA for coronary intervention using OCT. We retrospectively analyzed 200 consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent coronary intervention guided by OCT and RA-OCT after dTRA at our center between June 2021 and November 2022. Total length of RA was divided into three segments based on the sheath location during dTRA: no sheath protection portion (proximal RA segment) and sheath protection portion (divided into mid- and distal segments). Acute RA injuries, including tears, dissections, perforations, thrombi, and spasms, were analyzed. Radial artery occlusion (RAO) was assessed using ultrasonography 24 h after dTRA. Acute RA injury was observed in 45.5% of patients after dTRA. The incidence of tear, dissection, perforation, thrombi, and spasm in all the patients was 11.5%, 16.5%, 1.5%, 17.5%, and 17.5%, respectively. In segment-level analysis, dissection and spasm were significantly more frequent in the proximal segment, followed by the mid and distal segments (11.0% vs. 5.5% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.015; 13.0% vs. 4.0% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.002). The rate of RAO at 24-h follow-up was 3.0%. Acute RA injuries were observed in nearly half of the patients using OCT via dTRA; dissection and spasm occurred more frequently in the proximal segment. Hydrophilic-coated sheaths have the potential advantage of preventing radial artery spasm and dissection.

Current alternatives to traditional radial approach for coronary interventions: A randomized prospective study of the ulnar and distal radial approaches

BACKGROUND

The radial artery is the standard access for coronary intervention; however, it is essential to have alternative accesses as it may be used as a conduit during coronary artery bypass grafting or for dialysis fistula. Ulnar and distal radial artery accesses have emerged as alternative accesses for traditional radial artery.

AIM

To compare distal radial artery access and ulnar artery access as alternatives to traditional radial artery access regarding safety, efficacy, and success rate.

METHODS

Two-hundred patients were included (100 traditional radial [TRA], 50 distal radial [DRA] and 50 ulnar). Access artery follow up ultrasound was performed up to 28 days.

RESULTS

Procedural success rate was 97%, 74%, and 92% in the TRA, DRA and ulnar groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Crossover occurred in 3 patients (3%) in TRA, 13 patients (26%) in DRA and 4 cases (8%) in ulnar group (p < 0.001). The most common cause of crossover was failure of artery cannulation. Regarding cannulation time, the mean access time in seconds was 80.19 ± 25.98, 148.4 ± 29.60, 90.5 ± 21.84 in TRA, DRA and ulnar groups, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study concluded that these new approaches proved to be potential alternatives to traditional radial approach; however, ulnar artery access proved to be superior to distal radial artery access as regards success rate and cannulation time.

Investigating optimal compression approach following radial artery puncture: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The method for compressing hemorrhagic sites after transradial access has been a topic of interest, yet definitive guidelines remain elusive. This study aims to address this gap by optimizing the mechanical compression hemostasis protocol after transradial access.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included 300 patients from the Department of Cerebrovascular Diseases, Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital affiliated to Tongji University, who underwent transradial access for cerebrovascular angiography. Following the procedure, patients received radial artery compression hemostasis using a balloon compressor. They were divided into group A (n=100, continuous deflation) and group B (n=200, intermittent deflation) according to different hemostasis methods. The incidence of bleeding at the puncture site and complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The rate of bleeding at the puncture site was significantly lower in group B (20 out of 200 patients) compared to group A (20 out of 100 patients) (P=0.032). Similarly, the incidence of puncture site complications, such as edema, congestion, and wound infection was lower in group B (5 out of 200 patients) compared to group A (10 out of 100 patients) (P=0.006).

CONCLUSION

Four hours of compression with intermittent deflation (group B) emerged as the optimal compression method after transradial access, demonstrating fewer complications at the patient's puncture site.

Incidence and Prognostic Factors of Radial Artery Occlusion in Transradial Coronary Catheterization

Background/Objectives: Radial artery occlusion (RAO) is the most common complication of transradial coronary catheterization. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the incidence of RAO and identify the risk factors that predispose patients to it. Methods: We conducted an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter, open-label study involving 1357 patients who underwent cardiac catheterization via the transradial route for angiography and/or a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify potential predictors of RAO occurrence. Additionally, a subgroup analysis only for patients undergoing PCIs was performed. Results: The incidence of RAO was 9.5% overall, 10.6% in the angiography-only group and 6.2% in the PCI group. Independent predictors of RAO were as follows: (i) the female gender (aOR = 1.72 (1.05-2.83)), (ii) access site cross-over (aOR = 4.33 (1.02-18.39)), (iii) increased total time of the sheath in the artery (aOR = 1.01 (1.00-1.02)), (iv) radial artery spasms (aOR = 2.47 (1.40-4.36)), (v) the presence of a hematoma (aOR = 2.28 (1.28-4.06)), (vi) post-catheterization dabigatran use (aOR = 5.15 (1.29-20.55)), (vii) manual hemostasis (aOR = 1.94 (1.01-3.72)) and (viii) numbness at radial artery ultrasound (aOR = 8.25 (1.70-40)). Contrariwise, two variables were independently associated with increased odds for radial artery patency (RAP): (i) PCI performance (aOR = 0.19 (0.06-0.63)), and (ii) a higher dosage of intravenous heparin per patient weight (aOR = 0.98 (0.96-0.99)), particularly, a dosage of >50 IU/kg (aOR = 0.56 (0.31-1.00)). In the PCI subgroup, independent predictors of RAO were as follows: (i) radial artery spasms (aOR = 4.48 (1.42-14.16)), (ii) the use of intra-arterial nitroglycerin as a vasodilator (aOR = 7.40 (1.67-32.79)) and (iii) the presence of symptoms at echo (aOR = 3.80 (1.46-9.87)), either pain (aOR = 2.93 (1.05-8.15)) or numbness (aOR = 4.66 (1.17-18.57)). On the other hand, the use of intra-arterial verapamil as a vasodilator (aOR = 0.17 (0.04-0.76)) was independently associated with a greater frequency of RAP. Conclusions: The incidence of RAO in an unselected, all-comers European population after transradial coronary catheterization for angiography and/or PCIs is similar to that reported in the international literature. Several RAO prognostic factors have been confirmed, and new ones are described. The female gender, radial artery trauma and manual hemostasis are the strongest predictors of RAO. Our results could help in the future identification of patients at higher risk of RAO, for whom less invasive diagnostic procedures maybe preferred, if possible.

Manual compression hemostasis using a hemostatic pad for the distal radial artery approach

BACKGROUND

The method of hemostasis for the distal radial approach has not been standardized, although this approach has become increasingly popular due to its advantages. In this study, we investigated the feasibility of manual compression hemostasis using a calcium alginate pad after coronary angiography via the distal radial approach.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected 150 consecutive patients (mean age, 74.9 ± 8.0 years; male, 75 %) who underwent coronary angiography via the distal radial artery with a predominantly 4 Fr sheath from April 2021 to December 2022 and were hemostatic according to the following methods. After sheath removal, hemostasis was achieved by manual compression for 10 min using a hemostatic pad containing calcium alginate. When hemostasis was confirmed, a small log-shaped gauze was placed over the pad and fixed using a self-adhesive elastic bandage for 2 h. All procedures were performed by four fellows just beginning the distal radial approach.

RESULTS

The mean compression time was 12.4 ± 4.8 min, and hemostasis was successfully achieved in all patients, allowing the release of the elastic bandage after 2 h, with only one patient oozing the next morning. There were no major complications, while one patient had a >10 cm hematoma. Compared to that of the first 15 patients, for each fellow, the compression time of the subsequent patients was significantly shorter (14.5 ± 6.7 vs 11.1 ± 2.1 min, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Manual compression hemostasis using calcium alginate pads for the distal radial artery approach appears feasible with a simple learning.

Overview of the distal radial access from the radial artery occlusion perspective

Conventional radial access in endovascular surgery has certain limitations, primarily associated with the presence of local complications and radial artery occlusion. Over the past 7 years, distal radial access has exploded into all areas of endovascular procedures, from interventional cardiology to vascular surgery and interventional oncology. However, puncture of the distal radial artery has its own nuances and features: a learning curve, the use of ultrasound navigation in the initial stages of mastering the access, limitations in patients with acute conditions (acute coronary syndrome and stroke). This review aims to analyze on important aspects of the procedure of distal radial access from preparation for it to hemostasis and to explore all data about the new roles of distal radial access in avoiding but also treating radial artery occlusion, as the first thing to begin with the development and implementation of new access.

A narrative review of history, advantages, future developments of the distal radial access

This article presents a historical excursus and a review of modern literature on distal radial access for interventional surgery, discussing the anatomical and physiological substantiation of the use of this access point in endovascular surgery, its advantages and disadvantages. The main considerations directly related to distal puncture, choice of instrumentation, hemostasis, possible complications, and prevention are analyzed. The major areas of interventional surgery (coronary, vascular, oncological, and neurointerventional), where the distal radial approach is actively used, are reflected and their characteristics are highlighted. In general, it has been shown that with the development of technology, improved manual skills, the widespread use of hydrophilic introducers, and modern sheathless guiding catheters, the vessel diameter, and puncture site are not decisive factors when choosing access for any type of intervention.

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.

Distal Radial Access: Is There a Clinical Benefit?

For decades, the femoral artery has been the most common vascular access for diagnostic and therapeutic endovascular procedures. However, over the past 20 years, radial access has been gaining popularity, as it is a safer and allows practical access with more benefits. Recently, the new distal radial access has proven to be an equal or perhaps even safer vascular access for diagnostic and therapeutic coronary and noncoronary interventions. Today, this access should be in the arsenal of every interventional surgeon.

The distal radial artery: Versatile vascular access for transcatheter interventions

Conventional transradial access has been established as the gold standard for invasive coronary angiography and percutaneous interventions by the current European and American guidelines. The distal or snuffbox radial artery access represents an alternative transradial access site that allows radial sheath insertion with the patient's hand pronated. Firstly described 40 years ago, it exploded in popularity only recently. Promising additional benefits, the distal radial access is increasingly being adopted in various types of percutaneous interventions, being preferred by many interventional cardiologists and radiologists for its reduced vascular complications and time to hemostasis, and improvement of patient and operator comfort. Other centers consider it a fad, waiting for solid clear evidence and benefits. The evidence is dynamic and discrepant, depending on the center, the operator, and how it was collected (randomized controlled vs observational studies). Another essential aspect raised by "skeptics" was whether distal radial access, by its smaller diameter and more angled course, can support all types of interventions. The aim of this review is to gather all the scenarios where distal radial access has been utilized and to conclude whether this vascular access is feasible across all transcatheter interventions.

A Randomized Comparison of Radial Artery Intimal Hyperplasia Following Distal Versus Proximal Transradial Access for Coronary Angiography: PRESERVE RADIAL

BACKGROUND

Distal transradial access (dTRA) is an alternative to conventional forearm transradial access (fTRA) for coronary angiography (CAG). Differences in healing of the radial artery (RA) in the forearm have not been evaluated between these 2 access strategies. We sought to compare the mean difference in forearm RA intimal-medial thickening (IMT) in patients randomized to dTRA versus fTRA.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this single-center randomized clinical trial, 64 patients undergoing nonemergent CAG were randomized (1:1) to dTRA versus fTRA. Ultra-high-resolution (55-MHz) vascular ultrasound of the forearm and distal RA was performed pre-CAG and at 90 days. The primary end point was the mean change in forearm RA IMT. Secondary end points included procedural characteristics, vascular injury, RA occlusion, and ipsilateral hand pain and function. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, mean forearm RA IMT, and procedural specifics were similar between the dTRA and fTRA cohorts. There was no difference in mean change in forearm RA IMT between the 2 cohorts (0.07 versus 0.07 mm; P=0.37). No RA occlusions or signs of major vascular injury were observed at 90 days. Ipsilateral hand pain and function (Borg pain scale score: 12 versus 11; P=0.24; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulders, and Hand scale score: 6 versus 8; P=0.46) were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Following CAG, dTRA was associated with no differences in mean change of forearm RA IMT, hand pain, and function versus fTRA for CAG. Further investigation is warranted to elucidate mechanisms and predictors of RA healing and identify effective strategies to preserving RA integrity for repeated procedures.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04801901.

Effectiveness and Safety of Left Distal Transradial Access in Coronary Procedures in the Caribbean

INTRODUCTION

This retrospective study investigated the effectiveness and safety of left distal transradial access (LDTRA) in patients with cardiovascular disease in Trinidad undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHOD

Procedural parameters, including technical success and safety outcomes such as vascular complications and radial artery occlusion (RAO), were assessed in 111 consecutive patients undergoing CAG or PCI from January 2023 to June 2023 at the Eric Williams Medical Sciences Complex, Trinidad and Tobago. Eighty-eight patients underwent LDTRA, while 23 received left transradial access (LTRA).

RESULTS

There was no difference in procedural success with LDTRA compared to LTRA, 90.9% vs. 100%, p-value 0.202, non-significant (ns). LDTRA was associated with shorter fluoroscopy times (8.4 ± 6.8 minutes vs. 12.4 ± 7.7 minutes, p-value = 0.02), procedural duration (26.7 ± 18 minutes vs. 35.8 ± 20 minutes, p-value = 0.04), and hemostasis time (142 ± 41 minutes vs. 186 ± 44 minutes, p-value < 0.05). There were no significant differences in procedural-related complications (8% for LDTRA vs. 4.3% for LTRA, p-value = 0.476, ns). There were no reported cases of RAO. In the subgroup of patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the fluoroscopy and procedure times were similar for both access sites; however, LDTRA was associated with a shorter hemostasis time (128 ± 30 minutes vs. 194 ± 39 minutes, p-value = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

LDTRA is effective and safe for coronary procedures and is associated with a shorter hemostasis time. This study may prove clinically pertinent in a limited-resource Caribbean setting.

Combined ultrasound and angiographic guidance to facilitate transradial access procedures

The introduction of transradial access for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures has led to a decrease in access site complications. The aim of this paper is to propose a combined stepwise technical approach where real time ultrasound ("echo-first" approach) can be used to select the best vascular access and, together with angiography, to manage the potential obstacles that may occur during transradial procedures. In each section, we summarize some tips and tricks based on both our experience and current literature that can be easily implemented in daily practice to increase the success of transradial procedures.

Open Radial Artery Study

Radial artery occlusion (RAO) has been the most common postprocedural complication of transradial artery access. The optimal method of prevention of RAO is still lacking. In our study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of patent hemostasis on early (24 hours) and late (2 weeks) RAO prevention. The Open Radial Artery Study was a single-arm, prospective, and multicenter study. The primary end points were early and late RAO at the vascular access site after transradial coronary procedures. Secondary end points were access site hematoma, pseudoaneurysm formation, arteriovenous fistula, and nerve injury. A total of 2,181 patients were analyzed (67% male, mean age 68 years). The mean interventional duration and hemostatic times were 75.6 ± 55.6 and 60 ± 5.6 minutes, respectively. Radial artery spasm occurred in 10% of patients (n = 218). Catheter kinking, radial artery rupture, or dissection were not observed during the procedure. RAO, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, or nerve damage was not observed in any of the patients in the early or late period. In patients who undergo coronary diagnostic or interventional procedures through transradial artery access, the patent hemostasis method seems a critical step in the prevention of early and late RAO.

Transradial or Transulnar Long Sheath Access to the Brachial Artery Allows for Neuroendovascular Procedures in Patients with Radial or Ulnar Artery Occlusion

BACKGROUND

Transradial access is an important tool for many neuroendovascular procedures. Occlusion of the radial or ulnar artery is not uncommon after transradial or transulnar access and can present a challenge for patients requiring repeat angiography.

METHODS

Between March 2022 and June 2023, patients undergoing transradial or transulnar angiography who were found to have a radial artery occlusion or ulnar artery occlusion were identified. Repeat catheterization of the occluded artery was attempted using a 21-gauge single wall puncture needle and a 0.021-inch wire to traverse the occlusion and insert a 23-cm sheath into the brachial artery.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients undergoing 26 angiograms during the study period were found to have a radial artery occlusion or ulnar artery occlusion. Successful repeat catheterization of the occluded artery was achieved in 21 of 26 cases (80.7%). Outer diameter sheath size ranged from 5 Fr (0.0655 inch) to 8 Fr (0.1048 inch). No access complications were encountered. Number of prior angiograms, time since prior angiogram, and prior angiogram procedure time were associated with lower likelihood of successful access.

CONCLUSIONS

Transradial or transulnar neuroangiography through an occluded radial or ulnar artery is safe and feasible by traversing the occlusion into the brachial artery with a 23-cm sheath. Repeat catheterization is most successful in patients with an arterial occlusion <6 months old. This technique is important in patients who have limited options for arterial access, avoiding access site complications inherent in transfemoral access, and in patients who specifically require radial or ulnar artery access.

Feasibility and Safety of the Routine Distal Transradial Approach in the Anatomical Snuffbox for Coronary Procedures: The ANTARES Randomized Trial

The distal transradial approach (dTRA) through the anatomical snuffbox is hypothesized to offer greater benefits than the conventional transradial access (cTRA) for patients undergoing coronary procedures. Our goal was to assess the safety and efficacy of dTRA. Out of 465 consecutive Caucasian patients, 400 were randomized (1:1) to dTRA or cTRA in a prospective single-center trial. Clinical and ultrasound follow-ups were obtained at 24 h and 60 days post-procedure. The primary combined endpoint consisted of access crossover, access-related complications, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary endpoints included clinical success endpoints (puncture success, crossover, and access time), access-site complications endpoints, and MACE at 60 days. The primary endpoint was significantly higher in the dTRA [odds ratio (OR): 2.31, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.38-3.86, p = 0.001]. Clinical success endpoints, namely crossover (10% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.05) and access-time [median: 140s (85-322) vs. 80s (58-127), p < 0.001], did not favor the dTRA, despite a similar success rate in radial artery puncture between the dTRA and cTRA (99.5% vs. 99%). Radial artery spasm (19% vs. 4.5%, p < 0.0001), physical discomfort during access, and transient thumb numbness after the procedure occurred more frequently with the dTRA. However, early (2.5% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.41) and mid-term (2.5% vs. 3%, p = 0.98) forearm radial artery occlusion rates were comparable between the dTRA and cTRA. Randomization to the dTRA, lower forearm radial pulse volume, higher body mass index, and lower body surface area independently predicted the primary endpoint in multivariate analysis. In the interaction effect analysis, only diabetes increased the incidence of the primary endpoint with the dTRA (OR: 18.67, 95% CI: 3.96-88.07). The dTRA was a less favorable strategy than cTRA during routine coronary procedures due to a higher incidence of arterial spasm and the necessity for access crossover. The majority of local complications following the dTRA were clinically minor complications. Individuals with diabetes were particularly susceptible to complications associated with the dTRA.

Randomized comparison of Glidesheath Slender with conventional 5Fr arterial sheaths for coronary angiography through the distal radial artery

BACKGROUND

The potential benefits of the thin-walled 5F Glidesheath Slender sheath in the distal transradial access (dTRA) have not been investigated. This study aimed to compare the Glidesheath Slender versus conventional 5Fr arterial sheaths in patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CAG) through the dTRA.

METHODS

A total of 352 consecutive patients with an indication for CAG were randomized (1:1) to Glidesheath Slender 5Fr versus a conventional 5Fr arterial sheath for dTRA. The primary endpoint was the rate of successful hemostasis at 30 minutes after sheath removal. Follow-up ultrasound of the right radial and distal radial artery was performed 7-10 days after the procedure.

RESULTS

After exclusion of patients where a 6Fr sheath or crossover of access site was required, 108 patients in the Glidesheath Slender and 105 patients in the conventional 5Fr arterial sheath group were included in the analysis. The crossover rate to conventional radial access and the rate of successful hemostasis at 30 minutes after sheath removal were similar between the two groups (18.9% in the Glidesheath slender vs. 22% in the control group; P=0.460, and 62% vs. 51.4%; P=0.118, respectively). The level of pain associated with the procedure was significantly lower in the Glidesheath Slender group (2.69 vs. 3.29 in the control group; P=0.02). No significant difference was recorded between the two groups in the rate of access-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of Glidesheath Slender for dTRA did not increase the rate of early hemostasis compared with conventional arterial sheath.

Prospective evaluation of efficacy and safety of distal radial and radial artery access using a novel articulating-tip guidewire

BACKGROUND

Guidewire-facilitated access to peripheral vessels is commonplace in vascular access, but guidewire insertion into small vessels, such as the radial and distal radial arteries, can still be challenging. Failure to gain access on the first attempt may contribute to increased risks of procedural complications, such as vessel dissection, spasm, and occlusion. This research assessed the safety and efficacy of radial and distal radial artery access using a novel, FDA-cleared, small-core-diameter guidewire with an articulating tip, under ultrasound guidance.

METHODS

This was a prospective, single-arm, single-center trial. Patients in need of vascular access were screened for participation and enrolled in the study. Guidewire insertion was attempted by four physicians (three interventional radiologists and an interventional nephrologist) at 162 arterial sites-65 radial and 97 distal radial, having a mean diameter of 2.0 mm.

RESULTS

First-attempt successful placement of the guidewire in the artery occurred at 87.6% of access sites (142/162) and differences in the success rate between the radial and distal radial arteries or between vessels with diameter smaller or larger than 2 mm were not observed (62/68 and 67/77, respectively; p = 0.6). Four of the five reported adverse events were unrelated to the study device or procedure. Two of the three distal radial artery spasms occurred before the guidewire was used. The other two events were a radial artery spasm, and a distal radial artery site hematoma. All adverse events resolved spontaneously.

CONCLUSIONS

First-attempt placement of a novel articulating tip guidewire in the radial and distal radial arteries occurred at a high rate in our study and was not associated with safety concerns.

Distal radial access for neuroangiography and neurointerventions: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many studies have shown that coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) via distal radial access (DRA) are safe and effective. Safety and efficacy of neuroangiography and neurointerventions via DRA are unknown.

PURPOSE

Search the literatures on neuroangiography and neurointerventions via DRA and conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane were searched from inception to November 10, 2022. After literature screening, data extraction and assessment of literature quality, random effects model was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 236 literatures were retrieved, and 17 literatures including 1163 patients were finally included for meta-analysis.The pooled access success rate was 0.96 (95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.98), and the heterogeneity was obvious (I2 = 55.5%). The pooled access-related complications incidence rate was 0.03 (95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.05), and the heterogeneity was not obvious (I2 = 15.8%).

CONCLUSION

Neuroangiography and neurointerventions via DRA may be safe and effective. DRA is an alternative access for neuroangiography and neurointerventions.

Chinese expert consensus on transradial access in percutaneous peripheral interventions

Transradial access (TRA) is a safe and comfortable approach and the preferred access for percutaneous coronary intervention. However, TRA is not widely used for peripheral interventions. Currently, there is a lack of data on patient selection, appropriate medical devices, complication prevention, and TRA adoption. Therefore, the Chinese Society of Interventional Oncology of the China Anti-Cancer Association organized nationwide experts to establish a Working Group of China Expert Consensus on TRA in percutaneous peripheral interventions in 2022, and jointly formulated this consensus to better promote the application of TRA in peripheral interventions to guide clinicians on patient selection, technical recommendations, and physician training. This consensus mainly focuses on the current situation, advantages and limitations of TRA in peripheral interventions, anatomical characteristics of the radial artery, patient selection, technical aspects, prevention and management of complications, radiation dose, and learning curve. A consensus was reached through a literature evaluation and by referring to the opinions of the expert group.

Incidence and predictors of radial artery occlusion following transradial coronary angiography: the proRadial trial

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the contemporary incidence and predictors of radial artery occlusion as well as the effectiveness of antithrombotic treatment for radial artery occlusion following transradial coronary angiography.

BACKGROUND

The radial artery is the standard access for coronary angiography and even complex interventions. Postprocedural radial artery occlusion is still a common and significant complication.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled 2004 patients following transradial coronary angiography. After sheath removal, hemostasis was obtained in a standardized fashion. Radial artery patency was evaluated by duplex ultrasonography in all patients. In case of occlusion, oral anticoagulation was recommended and patients were scheduled for a 30-day follow-up including Doppler ultrasonography.

RESULTS

A new-diagnosed radial occlusion was found in 4.6% of patients. The strongest independent predictors of radial occlusion were female sex and active smoking status. In the subgroup of patients with percutaneous coronary interventions, female sex followed by sheath size > 6 French were the strongest predictors of radial occlusion. 76 of 93 patients with radial occlusion received an oral anticoagulation for 30 days. However, reperfusion at 30 days was found in 32% of patients on oral anticoagulation.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of radial artery occlusion following coronary angiography in contemporary practice appears with 4.6% to be lower as compared to previous cohorts. Female sex and smoking status are the strongest independent predictors of radial occlusion followed by procedural variables. The limited effectiveness of oral anticoagulation for treatment of radial artery occlusion suggests a primarily traumatic than thrombotic mechanism of this complication.

Radial artery occlusion after transradial procedures: impact on 1-year adverse events

BACKGROUND

Radial artery occlusion after transradial procedures is a frequent iatrogenic thrombotic process. The impact on prognosis has not been investigated. This study sought to investigate whether radial artery occlusion is related to increased risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, stroke and coronary revascularization.

METHODS

Eight hundred thirty-seven consecutive patients who underwent a transradial coronary procedure had patency of radial artery checked at 24 hours. Radial artery occlusion occurred in 41 over 837 patients (4.8%); 764 (91.2%) were available for planned follow-up at 1 year and were included in the analysis. Event-free survival rate between patients with and without radial artery occlusion was calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify independent risk factors.

RESULTS

At a median 370-day follow-up (IQR: 366-375 days), adverse events occurred in 37 patients (4.8%), 2 in patients with radial artery occlusion and 35 in patients without. One-year survival rate was 94.9% vs. 95% (unadjusted HR=1.026, 95% CI: 0.24 to 4.6, P=0.9). After multivariable modeling, age and coronary artery disease extension was associated with increased risk of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Age and coronary artery disease extension were independent predictors of adverse events at follow-up. RAO had no prognostic impact.

Alternative (Transulnar or Distal Radial) Arterial Access for Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Subanalysis from the Minimalistic Hybrid Approach Algorithm Registry)

The transradial approach (TRA) has become the primary choice for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, it may not be always feasible because of clinical and/or technical challenges. Alternative forearm accesses, such as transulnar approach (TUA) and distal radial approach (dTRA) may allow maintaining a wrist approach for the procedure, avoiding the femoral artery. This issue is particularly relevant in patients who underwent multiple revascularizations, such as those with chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions. This study aimed to evaluate whether the use of TUA and/or dTRA is comparable with TRA in CTO PCI using a minimalistic hybrid approach algorithm, which limits the number of accesses used to minimize vascular access complications. Patients with CTO PCI treated solely through a fully alternative approach (TUA and/or dTRA) were compared with those treated solely through a standard TRA approach. The primary efficacy end point was procedural success, whereas the primary safety end point was the composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events and vascular complications. Of 201 CTO PCIs attempted, 154 procedures were considered for analysis (standard, n = 104, alternative, n = 50). Alternative and standard groups demonstrated comparable rates of both procedural success (92% vs 94.2%, p = 0.70) and primary safety end point (4.8% vs 6.0%, p = 0.70). Of interest, 7 French guiding catheters were more frequently used in the alternative group (44% vs 26%, p = 0.028). In conclusion, CTO PCI after minimalistic hybrid approach by way of alternative forearm vascular accesses (dTRA and/or TUA) is feasible and safe to perform, compared with CTO PCI by way of standard TRA.

Vascular Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Chronic Total Occlusions: A State-of-the-Art Review

The outcomes of chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention have considerably improved during the last decade with continued emphasis on improving procedural safety. Vascular access site bleeding remains one of the most frequent complications. Several procedural strategies have been implemented to reduce the rate of vascular access site complications. This state-of-the-art review summarizes and describes the current evidence on optimal vascular access strategies for chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention.

A Randomized Comparison of Radial Artery Intimal Hyperplasia Following Distal vs. Proximal Transradial Access for Coronary Angiography: PRESERVE RADIAL Trial

Background

Distal transradial access (dTRA) is an alternative to conventional forearm transradial access (fTRA) for coronary angiography (CAG). Differences in healing of the radial artery in the forearm (FRA) have not been evaluated between these 2 access strategies. We sought to compare FRA intimal-medial thickening (IMT) in patients randomized to dTRA vs. fTRA for CAG.

Methods and Results

Sixty-four consecutive patients undergoing non-emergent CAG were randomized (1:1) to dTRA vs. fTRA. Ultrahigh resolution (55 MHz) vascular ultrasound) of the FRA and distal RA was performed pre-CAG and at 90 days. Primary endpoint was 90-day FRA IMT. Secondary endpoints included procedural characteristics, vascular injury, RA occlusion and ipsilateral hand pain and function. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, mean FRA IMT, time to RA access, procedure time, and radiation exposure were similar between the dTRA and fTRA cohorts. There were no between group differences in 90-day FRA IMT (0.37 mm vs 0.38 mm, respectively; p =0.73). No RA occlusions or signs of major vascular injury were observed at 90 days. Ipsilateral hand pain and function (Borg pain scale:12 vs 11, p =0.24; DASH scores: 6 vs 8, p =0.46) were comparable.

Conclusions

In this single center randomized clinical trial, similar patterns of FRA vascular healing at 90 days, procedural results as well as hand pain and function were observed following dTRA vs. fTRA for CAG. Further investigation is warranted to better understand the mechanistics and predictors of RA healing and to identify strategies aimed at preserving RA integrity for future procedures.

What is New?

DTRA has been proposed as an alternative to traditional fTRA in the wrist for CAG and PCI because of ergonomic and post-procedural recovery benefits to the patient, as well as potential reductions in occlusion of the FRA.There are gaps in knowledge, however, regarding potential differences in remodeling of the FRA in patients undergoing dTRA versus fTRA.In this randomized clinical trial, there were no differences in IMT and patterns of vascular injury and healing, using ultrahigh resolution (55 MHz) ultrasound, at 90 days in patients randomized to dTRA or FTRA for elective and non-emergent CAG and PCI.

What Are the Clinical Implications

Our findings highlight the need for further inquiry through large multicenter randomized clinical trials to better the understand the mechanistics and predictors of IMT and to identify strategies to mitigate the adverse effects of vessel remodeling in patients undergoing TRA across the entire severity spectrum of cardiovascular disease.

Comparison of the feasibility and safety between distal transradial access and conventional transradial access in patients with acute chest pain: a single-center cohort study using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Distal transradial access (dTRA) has been suggested to have great advantages over cTRA. However, there is a lack of preliminary data on dTRA in patients undergoing emergency coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). To explore the feasibility and safety of distal transradial access in patients with acute chest pain.

METHODS

A total of 1269 patients complaining of acute chest pain in our emergency department from January 2020 to February 2022 were retrospectively included. The patients who met the inclusion criteria were divided into the conventional transradial access (cTRA) group (n = 238) and the dTRA group (n = 158). Propensity score matching was used to minimize the baseline differences.

RESULTS

The cannulation success rate in the dTRA group was significantly lower than that in the cTRA group (87.41% vs. 94.81%, p < 0.05). No significant differences in the puncture time and total procedure time were noted between the two groups (p > 0.05). Compared with the cTRA group, the hemostasis duration was significantly shorter [4(4, 4) h vs. 10(8, 10) h, p < 0.001) and the incidence of minor bleeding (BARC Type I and II) was significantly lower in the dTRA group than that in the cTRA group (0.85% vs. 5.48%, p = 0.045). Asymptomatic radial artery occlusion was observed in six patients (5.83%) in the cTRA group and one patient (1.14%) in the dTRA group (p = 0.126). The subgroup analysis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) showed no significant differences in the puncture time, D-to-B time or total procedure time between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The dTRA for emergency CAG or PCI has an acceptable success rate and puncture time, a shorter hemostasis time, and a downward trend in RAO rate compared to the cTRA. The dTRA did not increase the D-to-B time in emergency coronary interventions in STEMI patients. On the contrary, a low incidence of RAO by the dTRA created an opportunity for future coronary interventions in non-culprit vessels in the same access.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registry number: ChiCTR2200061104, date of registration: June 15, 2022).

Comparison of distal transradial approach versus conventional transradial approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: A prospective observational study

Background

Compared with the conventional transradial approach (TRA), there are limited data on the efficacy and safety of the novel distal transradial approach (DTRA). This study aimed to verify the effectiveness and safety of the DTRA for percutaneous coronary angiography and intervention. Besides, we also try to highlight the potential of the DTRA in reducing radial artery occlusion (RAO), shorter time to hemostasis, and improved patient comfort.

Methods

This single-center prospective observational study enrolled patients treated with DTRA (n = 527) in the first 9 months and with TRA (n = 586) in the next 8 months from May 2020 to December 2021. The primary endpoint was the proximal RAO rate at 30 days.

Results

Baseline data were similar between the two groups. The proximal radial artery occlusion rate at 30 days [2.3% vs. 7.0%], the success rate of puncture [86.4% vs. 96.7%], the Numeric Rating Scale score [1.97 ± 1.89 vs. 4.61 ± 2.68], and the incidence of postoperative subcutaneous hematoma and finger numbness [3.4% vs. 8.2%, 2.7% vs. 4.4%] were lower. The puncture time [6.93 ± 7.25 min vs. 3.18 ± 3.52 min] was longer, and the time until radial compression device removal was shorter [CAG: 138.61 ± 38.73 min vs. 191.6 ± 61.22 min, PCI:221.46 ± 62.45 min vs. 276.28 ± 76.39 min] in the DTRA group than TRA group (all P < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the DTRA (OR 0.231, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.088-0.769, P = 0.001),BMI<18.5 kg/m2 (OR 2.627, 95% CI 1.142-4.216, P = 0.004), Diabetes mellitus (OR 2.15, 95%CI1.212-3.475, P = 0.014), RCD removal time (CAG,min) (OR 1.091, 95% CI 1.013-1.441, P = 0.035) and RCD removal time (PCI,min) (OR 1.067, 95% CI 1.024-1.675, P = 0.022) were the independent risk factors of RAO 1 month after intervention procedure.

Conclusion

DTRA was found to a lower incidence of postoperative RAO and bleeding-related complications, shorter time to achieve hemostasis, and greater patient comfort.

Rationale and Design of the Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion Trial (CAPITAL-RAPTOR)

INTRODUCTION

Transradial access (TRA) has rapidly emerged as the preferred vascular access site for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Radial artery occlusion (RAO) remains as an important complication of TRA as it precludes future ipsilateral transradial procedures. While intraprocedural anticoagulation has been studied extensively, the definitive role of postprocedural anticoagulation has not yet been established.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Rivaroxaban Post-Transradial Access for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion trial is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint design study investigating the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban to reduce the incidence of RAO. Eligible patients will undergo randomisation to receive either rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily for 7 days or to no additional postprocedural anticoagulation. Doppler ultrasound to assess radial artery patency will be performed at 30 days.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been approved by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board (approval number 20180319-01H). The study results will be disseminated via conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03630055.

Cocoa flavanol supplementation preserves early and late radial artery function after transradial catheterization

Background: The transradial approach for coronary angiography is associated with fewer complications and preferred over the femoral approach. Injury to the radial artery (RA) endothelium elicits intimal hyperplasia, possibly resulting in total occlusion and limb functional decline. Flavanols are known to improve endothelial function. Effects on arterial remodeling after mechanical injury are unknown. Objective: To investigate the effects of cocoa flavanols on (a) intimal hyperplasia and (b) endothelial functional recovery after mechanical vascular wall injury through transradial coronary angiography (TCA). Methods: Primary endpoint in this double-blind, randomized, controlled trial was RA intima-media thickness (IMT) after 6 months follow-up (FU). Secondary endpoints were RA flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) and fractional diameter change (Fdc). Further luminal diameter and circulating endothelial microparticles (EMP) were assessed. Thirty-six male patients undergoing elective TCA were included. Flavanol or matched placebo supplementation started 7 days prior TCA (cocoa flavanol 1000 mg day^-1) for 14 days. Four measurements spanned three periods over 6-moths-FU. Results: TCA induced sustained intimal hyperplasia in the placebo-, but not in the flavanol-group (IMT 0.44 ± 0.01 vs. 0.37 ± 0.01 mm, p = 0.01). FMD decreased after TCA in both groups, but recovered to baseline after 6 months in the flavanol group only. Fdc acutely decreased, EMPs increased in the placebo-, not in the flavanol -group. Luminal diameter remained unchanged in both groups. Conclusion: Peri-interventional cocoa flavanol supplementation prevents long-term intima media thickening and endothelial dysfunction 6 months after TCA opening the perspective for dietary interventions to mitigate endothelial cell damage and intimal hyperplasia after mechanical injury.

Impact of radial compression protocols on radial artery occlusion and hemostasis time in coronary angiography

Protocols for hemostasis after trans-radial approach (TRA) vary depending on the institute as there is no established evidence-based protocol. This study aimed to investigate the clinical implications of radial compression protocols. Consecutive patients who underwent outpatient invasive catheter angiography before and after April 2018 were treated with traditional and new protocols, respectively. Using the same hemostasis band, in the conventional protocol, fixed amount of air was removed soon after the procedure, 2 h later, and 3 h later, whereas the air was removed as much as possible every 30 min in the new protocol. A total of 1842 patients (71 ± 10 years old, 77% male) were included. Compared with the traditional protocol group (n = 1001), the new protocol group (n = 841) had a significantly lower rate of dual antiplatelet therapy (35% and 24% in the traditional and new groups, respectively, p < 0.001). The time required for complete hemostasis was approximately one-third with the new protocol (190 ± 16 and 66 ± 32 min, p < 0.001) with no clinically relevant bleeding. The incidence of radial artery occlusion (RAO) was 9.8% and 0.9% in the traditional and new protocol groups, respectively (p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, the new protocol was associated with a reduced risk of RAO (odds ratio 0.10, p < 0.001) and a shorter hemostasis time (odds ratio 0.01, p < 0.001). The new protocol for hemostasis after TRA was strongly associated with a shorter hemostasis time and a lower rate of RAO.

Comparison of Safety of RADial comPRESSion Devices: A Multi-Center Trial of Patent Hemostasis following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention from Conventional Radial Access (RAD-PRESS Trial)

Although radial access is the current gold standard for the implementation of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), post-procedural radial compression devices are seldom compared with each other in terms of safety or efficacy. Our group aimed to compare a cost effective and potentially green method to dedicated radial compression devices, with respect to access site complications combined in a device oriented complex endpoint (DOCE), freedom from which served as our primary endpoint. Patients undergoing PCI were randomized to receive either the cost effective or a dedicated device, either of which were removed using patent hemostasis. Twenty-four hours after the procedure, radial artery ultrasonography was performed to evaluate the access site. The primary endpoint was assessed using a non-inferiority framework with a non-inferiority margin of five percentage points, which was considered as the least clinically meaningful difference. The cost-effective technique and the dedicated devices were associated with a comparably low rate of complications (freedom from DOCE: 83.3% vs. 70.8%, absolute risk difference: 12.5%, one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11%). Composition of the DOCE (i.e., no complication, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, and radial artery occlusion) and compression time were also assessed in superiority tests as secondary endpoints. Both the cost-effective technique and the dedicated devices were associated with comparably low rates of complications: p = 0.1289. All radial compression devices performed similarly when considering the time to complete removal of the respective device (120.0 (inter-quartile range: 100.0-142.5) for the vial vs. 120.0 (inter-quartile range: 110.0-180) for the dedicated device arm, with a median difference of [95% CI]: 7.0 [-23.11 to 2.00] min, p = 0.2816). In conclusion, our cost-effective method was found to be non-inferior to the dedicated devices with respect to safety, therefore it is a safe alternative to dedicated radial compression devices, as well as seeming to be similarly effective.

Modified Patent Hemostasis Strategy Based on the Platelet Counts for Transradial Access Chemoembolization in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Prospective Single-Center Study

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the shortest compression time to achieve hemostasis and the optimal hemostasis strategy in patients treated with transradial access chemoembolization (TRA-TACE).

Methods

From October 2019 to October 2021, 119 consecutive patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent 134 sessions of TRA-TACE were included in this prospective single-center study. The compression time was measured by decompressing the device for 30 min, and thereafter, every 10 min after the procedure until complete hemostasis was achieved.

Results

Technical success was achieved for all TRA procedures. None of the patients experienced major TRA-related adverse events. Minor adverse events occurred in 7.5% of the patients. The mean compression time was 31.8 ± 5.0 min. Factors that may impact hemostasis were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses, and a platelet count < 100×10⁹ /L (p = 0.016, odds ratio = 3.942) was found to be an independent factor that could predict the failure to achieve hemostasis within 30 min. For patients with a platelet count < 100×10⁹ /L, the compression time required to achieve hemostasis was 60 min. For patients with a platelet count ≥ 100×10⁹ /L, the compression time required to achieve hemostasis was 40 min.

Conclusion

To achieve hemostasis in patients with HCC treated with TRA-TACE, compression for 60 min is sufficient for those with a platelet count < 100×10⁹ /L, and compression for 40 min is sufficient for those with a platelet count ≥ 100×10⁹ /L.

[Imaging and radial approach]

Radial approach allows in a large majority of cases to perform endovascular imaging. If we can assess anatomical variations with angiography, echography approach begins a mandatory tool to do the puncture safely, but also allows to identify anatomical variations and complications.

The efficacy of nitroglycerin to prevent radial artery spasm and occlusion during and after transradial catheterization: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Radial artery spasm (RAS) is the most common cause of transradial access site crossover and is a common intra-procedural complication. RAS incidence can lead to radial artery occlusion (RAO) postprocedure, preventing the radial artery as a future access site. We evaluated the efficacy of nitroglycerin preventing RAS and RAO during transradial catheterization discussing the different routes of administration, including topical, subcutaneous, and intra-arterial. A systematic review and meta-analysis included all relevant articles until April 23, 2022. We searched six databases Google Scholar, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed (MEDLINE), and CENTRAL. We registered our review protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022330356. We included 11 trials with 5814 patients. Compared to placebo, the pooled analysis favored subcutaneous nitroglycerin in preventing RAS (risk ratio [RR]: 0.57 with 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.43-0.77], p = .0003) and RAO (RR: 0.39 with 95% CI [0.16-0.98], p = .05). In contrast to the intra-arterial nitroglycerin that showed nonstatistically significant results in preventing RAS and RAO (RR: 0.8 with 95% CI [0.63-1.02], p = .07)- (RR: 0.78 with 95% CI [0.6-1.01], p = .06)), respectively. Also, topical nitroglycerin did not prevent RAS (RR: 0.73 with 95% CI [0.42-1.24], p = .24). Compared with placebo, subcutaneous nitroglycerin during transradial catheterization reduced the incidence of RAS and RAO. Meanwhile, Intra-arterial and topical nitroglycerin did not show statistically significant outcomes. Subcutaneous nitroglycerin may be a practical and cost-effective technique to facilitate transradial catheterization; however, more RCTs are needed to evaluate the subcutaneous versus intra-arterial nitroglycerin administration.

Early prevention of radial artery occlusion via distal transradial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Conventional transradial access (TRA) has been the preferred access for coronary intervention. Recently, distal radial access (DRA) is introduced as an alternative choice to reduce radial artery occlusion (RAO) risk. The study sought to assess the impact of DRA on early RAO using Doppler ultrasound in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

This is a prospective, single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial in which patients with indications for primary PCI from January 2022 to September 2022 were assigned to DRA or TRA group with 100 cases in each group. The primary endpoint was the incidence of forearm RAO, evaluated by Doppler ultrasound before discharge.

RESULTS

The rate of access success was comparable between the DRA and TRA groups (98.0 vs. 94.0%, P = 0.279). Compared with the TRA group, longer puncture time was observed in the DRA group [2.4 (1.7-4.2) min vs. 1.7 (1.4-2.3) min; P < 0.001] whereas the door-to-wire time was not delayed in primary PCI [71 (54-88) min vs. 64 (56-82) min, P = 0.103]. Shorter hemostasis time was required in the DRA group [3.1 (2.7-3.3) h vs. 6.2 (5.9-6.4) h; P < 0.001]. Significant reduction of the incidence of forearm RAO was observed in the DRA group (2.0 vs. 9.0%, P = 0.030). Local hematomas ≤ 5 cm was similar in both groups (4.0 vs. 6.0%, P = 0.516), while those > 5 cm were significantly more frequent in the TRA group (0 vs. 6.0%, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Distal radial access is associated with a comparable lower incidence of forearm RAO, shorter hemostasis time, and lower rate of vascular complications compared to TRA in primary PCI.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

[https://www.chictr.org.cn], identifier [ChiCTR2200061841].

Distal vs Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and/or Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing distal radial access (DRA) with conventional radial access (RA) is available.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative appraisal of the effects of DRA) vs conventional RA for coronary angiography with or without intervention.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for RCT comparing DRA vs conventional RA for coronary angiography and/or intervention. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was radial artery occlusion (RAO) at the longest available follow-up.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies enrolling 6,208 participants were included. Compared with conventional RA, DRA was associated with a significant lower risk of RAO, either detected at latest follow-up (risk ratio [RR]: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.23-0.56; P < 0.001; number needed to treat [NNT] = 30) or in-hospital (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.19-0.53; P < 0.001; NNT = 28), as well as EASY (Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries) ≥II hematoma (RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27-0.96; P = 0.04; NNT = 107). By contrast, DRA was associated with a higher risk of access site crossover (RR: 3.08; 95% CI: 1.88-5.06; P < 0.001; NNT = 12), a longer time for radial puncture (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 3.56; 95% CI: 0.96-6.16; P < 0.001), a longer time for sheath insertion (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16-0.58; P < 0.001), and a higher number of puncture attempts (SMD: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.48-0.69; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with conventional RA, DRA is associated with lower risks of RAO and EASY ≥II hematoma but requires longer time for radial artery cannulation and sheath insertion, more puncture attempts, and a higher access site crossover.

Simultaneous Radial and Ipsilateral Ulnar Artery Compression versus Isolated Radial Artery Compression after Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and/or Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Simultaneous ulnar and radial artery compression (SURC) has emerged as a strategy to increase radial artery flow and mitigate radial artery occlusion (RAO) while achieving adequate hemostasis after transradial access (TRA), though its technical adoption has been limited worldwide. Methods: A systematic search of studies comparing SURC versus isolated radial artery compression after TRA for coronary angiography and/or intervention was performed. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using random-effects models. Odds ratios (OR) with relative 95% confidence intervals (CI) and standardized mean difference were used as measures of effect estimates. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of overall RAO. Results: A total of 6 studies and 6793 patients were included. SURC method as compared to isolated radial artery compression was associated with a lower risk of RAO both overall (OR 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13−0.61, p < 0.001; number needed to treat to benefit [NNTB] =38) and in-hospital (OR 0.28; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.75; p = 0.01, NNTB = 36), with a reduced risk of unsuccessful patent hemostasis (OR: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.85; p = 0.03, NNT = 5) and upper extremity pain (OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.95; p = 0.04, NNTB = 124). No significant difference was observed in hemostasis time and in the risk of hematoma. Conclusion: Compared to isolated radial artery compression, SURC is associated with lower risk of RAO, unsuccessful patent hemostasis, and reported upper limb pain, without any trade-off in safety outcomes. With further development of dedicated dual compression devices, the proposed technique should be freed from usage constraints.

Distal Radial Artery Access for Recanalization of Radial Artery Occlusion and Repeat Intervention: A Single Center Experience

Background: Once occluded, the radial artery becomes unsuitable for repeat interventions and obligates the need for alternative vascular access, such as the femoral approach, which is not encouraged by current guidelines. With the dissemination of distal radial access (DRA), which allows the cannulation of the artery in its distal segment and which remains patent even in the case of radial artery occlusion (RAO), the option to perform angioplasty at this level becomes feasible. Methods: Thirty patients with RAO were enrolled in this pilot study. Recanalization was performed through DRA using hydrophilic guidewires. The feasibility endpoint was procedural success, namely the successful RAO recanalization, the efficacy endpoint was patency of the artery at 30 days, and the safety endpoint was the absence of periprocedural vascular major complications or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Results: The mean age of the patients was 63 ± 11 years, and 15 patients (50%) were men. Most patients had asymptomatic RAO (n = 28, 93.3%), and only two (6.6%) reported numbness in their hands. The most common indication for the procedure was PCI (19, 63.2%). Total procedural time was 41 ± 22 min, while the amount of contrast used was 140 ± 28 mL. Procedural success was 100% (n = 30). Moreover, there were no major vascular complications (0%); only two small hematomas were described (10%) and one had an angiographically visible perforation (3%). One case of periprocedural stroke was reported (3%), with onset immediately after the procedure and recovering 24 h later. Twenty-seven radial arteries (90%) remained patent at the one-month follow-up. Conclusions: RAO recanalization is feasible and safe, and by using dedicated hydrophilic guidewires, the success rate is high without significantly increasing procedural time or the amount of used contrast.

Upper Extremity Function following Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results of the ARCUS Trial

Objectives. To determine the incidence of upper extremity dysfunction (UED), after a transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TR-PCI). Background. Transradial approach (TRA) is the preferred approach for coronary interventions. However, upper extremity complications may be underreported. Methods. The ARCUS was designed as a prospective cohort study, including 502 consecutive patients admitted for PCI. Patients treated with transfemoral PCI (TF-PCI) acted as a control group. A composite score of physical examinations and questionnaires was used for determining UED. Clinical outcomes were monitored during six months of follow-up, with its primary endpoint at two weeks. Results. A total of 440 TR-PCI and 62 control patients were included. Complete case analysis (n = 330) at 2 weeks of follow-up showed that UED in the TR-PCI group was significantly higher than that in the TF-PCI group: 32.7% versus 13.9%, respectively ( $p=0.04$ ). The three impaired variables most contributing to UED were impaired elbow extension, wrist flexion, and extension. Multivariate logistic regression showed that smokers were almost three times more likely to develop UED. Conclusions. This study demonstrates that UED seems to occur two times more in TR-PCI than in TF-PCI at 2 weeks of follow-up. However, no significant long-term difference or difference between the intervention arm and the contralateral arm was found at all timepoints.

Efficacy and Safety of Coronary Intervention via Distal Transradial Access (dTRA) in Patients with Low Body Mass Index

The study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of coronary intervention via distal transradial access (dTRA) in patients with low body mass index (BMI). A total of 67 patients with low BMI who underwent coronary intervention, comprising 29 patients via dTRA and 38 patients via conventional transradial access (cTRA), were retrospectively included. There was no significant difference in the puncture success rate between the two groups (dTRA 96.6%, cTRA 97.4%, P=0.846). Compared with the cTRA group, the success rate of one-needle puncture in the dTRA group was lower (51.7% vs. 81.6%, P=0.020). The compression haemostasis time in the dTRA group was shorter than that in the cTRA group (P  <  0.001). However, the incidence of radial artery occlusion was lower in the dTRA group than in the cTRA group (4.0% vs. 33.3%, P=0.007). In conclusion, coronary intervention via dTRA was safe and effective in patients with low BMI.

International Hand Function Study Following Distal Radial Access: The RATATOUILLE Study

BACKGROUND

Distal radial access (DRA) has been proposed to improve procedure ergonomics and favor radial artery patency. Although promising data, nothing is known on evolving hand function after DRA.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to comprehensively evaluate hand function in patients undergoing DRA.

METHODS

Real-world patients undergoing DRA undertook a thorough multimodality assessment of hand function implementing multidomain questionnaires (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Levine-Katz), and motor (pinch grip test) and sensory (Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments test) examinations of both hands. All assessments were performed at preprocedural baseline and planned at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up (FU). Adverse clinical and procedural events were documented too.

RESULTS

Data of 313 patients (220 men, age 66 ± 10 years) from 9 international centers were analyzed. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and the Levine-Katz scores slightly improved from baseline to FU (P = 0.008 and P = 0.029, respectively). Pinch strength mildly improved from baseline to FU (P < 0.001 for both the left and right hands). Similarly, touch pressure threshold appeared to faintly improve in both the left and right hands (P < 0.012 for all the sites). For both motor and sensory function tests, comparable findings were found for the DRA hand and the contralateral one, with no significant differences between them. Repeated assessment of all tests over all FU time points similarly showed lack of worsening hand function. Access-related adverse events included 19 harmless bleedings and 3 forearm radial artery and 3 distal radial artery occlusions. None affected hand function at FU.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic multidimensional assessment, DRA was not associated with hand function impairment. Moreover, DRA emerges as a safe alternative vascular access.

Distal Versus Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention: The DISCO RADIAL Trial

BACKGROUND

Currently, transradial access (TRA) is the recommended access for coronary procedures because of increased safety, with radial artery occlusion (RAO) being its most frequent complication, which will increasingly affect patients undergoing multiple procedures during their lifetimes. Recently, distal radial access (DRA) has emerged as a promising alternative access to minimize RAO risk. A large-scale, international, randomized trial comparing RAO with TRA and DRA is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the superiority of DRA compared with conventional TRA with respect to forearm RAO.

METHODS

DISCO RADIAL (Distal vs Conventional Radial Access) was an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in which patients with indications for percutaneous coronary procedure using a 6-F Slender sheath were randomized to DRA or TRA with systematic implementation of best practices to reduce RAO. The primary endpoint was the incidence of forearm RAO assessed by vascular ultrasound at discharge. Secondary endpoints include crossover, hemostasis time, and access site-related complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 657 patients underwent TRA, and 650 patients underwent DRA. Forearm RAO did not differ between groups (0.91% vs 0.31%; P = 0.29). Patent hemostasis was achieved in 94.4% of TRA patients. Crossover rates were higher with DRA (3.5% vs 7.4%; P = 0.002), and median hemostasis time was shorter (180 vs 153 minutes; P < 0.001). Radial artery spasm occurred more with DRA (2.7% vs 5.4%; P = 0.015). Overall bleeding events and vascular complications did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

With the implementation of a rigorous hemostasis protocol, DRA and TRA have equally low RAO rates. DRA is associated with a higher crossover rate but a shorter hemostasis time.

Different Antiplatelet Strategies for Radial Artery Protection After Transradial Coronary Angiography—A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Introduction

Radial artery occlusion (RAO) after transradial access is a common thrombotic complication. A meta-analysis has proven that RAO incidence in transradial coronary angiography (TRCA) settings was significantly higher than that in percutaneous coronary intervention settings. This prospective observational cohort aimed to evaluate radial artery protection after TRCA with different antiplatelet strategies.

Methods

A total of 2,316 patients undergoing TRCA was enrolled and divided into two groups: single-antiplatelet and dual-antiplatelet groups. Radial artery patency was evaluated by ultrasound before, at 24 h, and 30 days after TRCA. The primary endpoint was RAO incidence at 30 days after TRCA.

Results

A total of 66 RAO was found on ultrasonography at 30-day follow-up (incidence: 2.8%). In the dual-antiplatelet group, the rate of RAO was significantly lower compared with the single-antiplatelet group (1.8 vs. 4.0%; odds ratio (OR): 0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24–0.70; p = 0.001). The rate of self-recanalization in the dual-antiplatelet group was significantly higher than that in the single-antiplatelet group (73.68 vs. 44.12%, p < 0.001). However, there was no statistical difference in delayed occlusion of radial artery between the two groups (0.5 vs. 0.2%, p = 0.140). Unexpectedly, this study also showed no significant difference in bleeding risk between the groups.

Conclusion

Dual-antiplatelet therapy for 1 month after TRCA was associated with a reduced risk of RAO and deemed safe.

Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion of 3 Hemostatic Methods in Transradial Intervention for Coronary Angiography

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of 3 hemostatic methods for the prevention of early radial artery occlusion (RAO): standard patent hemostasis, patent hemostasis with ulnar compression or the ulnar artery transient compression facilitating radial artery patent hemostasis (ULTRA) method, and facilitated hemostasis with a hemostatic disc.

BACKGROUND

There are no prospective randomized studies that compare early RAO rates with the 3 most used nonocclusive hemostatic methods.

METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal, comparative, and randomized study. The final population analyzed was 1,469, and they were randomized into 3 groups: 491 patients in group 1 with standard patent hemostasis, 490 patients in group 2 with the ULTRA method, and 488 patients in group 3 with facilitated hemostasis with a hemostatic disc.

RESULTS

The RAO rate at 24 hours of the total population analyzed was 4.6%. By hemostasis groups, it was 3.6% for patent hemostasis, 5.5% for the ULTRA method, and 4.7% for facilitated hemostasis with a hemostatic disc, with no statistical difference among the 3 groups (P = 0.387). At 30 days, the overall rate of RAO was 1.8%, and by groups, it was 1.4% for the patent hemostasis group, 1.8% for the ULTRA method group, and 2.2% for the facilitated hemostasis with a hemostatic disc group, respectively (P = 0.185).

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of RAO at 24 hours evaluated by plethysmography oximetry and confirmed by ultrasound among 3 current radial hemostasis methods (ie, patent hemostasis, the ULTRA method, and facilitated hemostasis with a hemostatic disc) are not different.

Randomized Clinical Trial on Prevention of Radial Occlusion After Transradial Access Using Nitroglycerin: PATENS Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether administration of nitroglycerin at the beginning or end of a transradial approach (TRA) procedure would preserve radial patency.

BACKGROUND

The TRA is becoming the preferred vascular access route in coronary interventions. Radial artery occlusion (RAO) is the most frequent complication. Routine vasodilator treatment aims to reduce spasm and possibly prevent RAO.

METHODS

The authors designed a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial, placebo-controlled trial encompassing patients undergoing the TRA. Patients were randomized to either 500 μg nitroglycerin or placebo; each arm was also subrandomized to early (upon sheath insertion) or late (right before sheath removal) nitroglycerin administration to evaluate the superiority of nitroglycerin in the prevention of RAO with 24 hours on Doppler ultrasound.

RESULTS

A total of 2,040 patients were enrolled. RAO occurred in 49 patients (2.4%). Fifteen of these patients (30.6%) showed re-establishment of flow at 30 days. Nitroglycerin, compared with placebo, did not reduce the risk for RAO at either of the 2 time points (early, 2.5% vs 2.3% [P = 0.66]; late, 2.3% vs 2.5% [P = 0.66]). By multivariable analysis, the presence of spasm (OR: 3.53; 95% CI: 1.87-6.65; P < 0.001) and access achieved with more than 1 puncture attempt (OR: 2.58; 95% CI: 1.43-4.66; P = 0.002) were independent predictors of RAO.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine use of nitroglycerin was not associated with a reduction in the rate of RAO, regardless of the time of administration (at the beginning or end of the TRA procedure).