Radial arterial access is a safe alternative to brachial artery and femoral artery access for endovascular lower extremity peripheral arterial disease

Radial Artery Access for Peripheral Vascular Interventions: A Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous radial artery access for lower extremity arterial interventions has increased in popularity in recent years. The purpose of this review is to summarize available data regarding its safety and efficacy.

METHODS

Studies related to the use of the percutaneous radial artery access for peripheral artery intervention were identified in a search of the PubMed database. Outcomes evaluated were access complications and technical success.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies that evaluated patients undergoing percutaneous radial artery access with peripheral interventions were reviewed. Several studies were able to demonstrate use of up to 8Fr sheath; however, the majority was 6Fr. Reported rates of asymptomatic radial artery occlusion ranged up to 16% and reported radial artery access site complication rate ranged from 0 to 15.6%. Technical success ranged from 74 to 98.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous radial artery access can effectively and safely be used in select patients.

Clinical Outcomes of Transradial vs Nontransradial Aortoiliac Endovascular Therapy

BACKGROUND

The introduction of radial-specific equipment has made transradial (TR) aortoiliac (AI) endovascular therapy (EVT) more convenient.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to investigate the perioperative outcomes of the TR approach in patients undergoing AI EVT for symptomatic peripheral artery disease.

METHODS

The COMFORT (Contemporary Strategy for Aortoiliac Intervention) registry was a prospective, multicenter, observational study enrolling patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease undergoing AI EVT between January 2021 and June 2023. The primary outcome was perioperative complications, whereas the secondary outcomes included core laboratory-evaluated residual stenosis >30%, time to hemostasis, time to ambulation, 30-day patency, and 30-day limb symptoms. These outcomes were compared between TR and non-TR AI EVT after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

The TR approach was selected for 231 of the 947 patients (24.3%). The TR approach was chosen more in patients with a higher ankle-brachial index, chronic total occlusion, aortic lesion, bare nitinol stent implantation, and plain angioplasty, whereas it was chosen less in patients with dialysis, a history of AI EVT, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, bilateral calcification, and simultaneous infrainguinal EVT (all P < 0.05). After propensity score matching, the incidence of perioperative complications did not differ significantly between the groups (TR group: 6.0% vs non-TR group: 5.1%; P = 0.69). The proportions of residual stenosis, 30-day patency, and 30-day limb symptoms were not significantly different (all P > 0.05); however, the time to hemostasis and the time to ambulation were shorter in the TR group (both P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-TR AI EVT and TR AI EVT using radial-specific equipment were associated with a similar risk of perioperative complications. The TR approach helps shorten the time required for hemostasis and ambulation.

Comparing Transbrachial and Transradial as Alternatives to Transfemoral Access for Large-Bore Neuro Stenting: Insights From a Propensity-Matched Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of transbrachial access (TBA) and transradial access (TRA) compared to transfemoral access (TFA) for large-bore neuro stenting (≥7 F).

METHODS

From January 2019 to January 2024, 4752 patients received large-bore neuro stenting in our center. The primary outcomes were procedural metrics. Safety outcomes were significant access site complications, including substantial hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, artery occlusion, and complications requiring treatment (medicine, intervention, or surgery). After propensity score matching with a ratio of 1:1:2 (TBA: TRA: TFA), adjusting for age, gender, aortic arch type, and neuro stenting as covariates, outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

46 TBA, 46 TRA and 92 TFA patients were enrolled. The mean age was 67.8 ± 11.2 years, comprising 127 (69.0%) carotid artery stenting and 57 (31.0%) vertebral artery stenting. The rates of technical success (TBA: 100%, TRA: 95.7%, TFA: 100%) and significant access site complications (TBA: 4.3%, TRA: 6.5%, TFA: 1.1%) were comparable between the groups (P > 0.05). Compared to TFA, the TRA cohort exhibited significant delays in angiosuite arrival to puncture time (14 vs. 8 min, P = 0.039), puncture to angiography completion time (19 vs. 11 min, P = 0.027), and procedural duration (42 vs. 29 min, P = 0.031). There were no substantial differences in procedural time metrics between TBA (10, 14, and 31 min, respectively) and TFA.

CONCLUSION

TBA and TRA as the primary access for large-bore neuro stenting are safe and effective. Procedural delays in TRA may favor TBA as the first-line alternative access to TFA.

Transradial Prostatic Artery Embolization as a Salvage Procedure in a Patient With Severe Deformities and Refractory Hematuria of Prostatic Origin

Benign prostatic hyperplasia is a common condition causing urinary symptoms in older men. It can sometimes lead to hematuria of prostatic origin, due to increased vascularity of the enlarged gland. If this type of hematuria is severe and refractory to conservative measures, it can be life-threatening. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) serves as a minimally invasive alternative to traditional surgical interventions, particularly in patients with comorbidities and contraindications to surgery. We present a case of a 79-year-old male with refractory hematuria of prostatic origin (RHPO), multiple comorbidities, and significant deformities of the left upper and both lower limbs. The patient was treated with PAE via the right radial artery, a less common approach in interventional radiology. The procedure was successful and led to a complete resolution of hematuria, with no complications. This report highlights the importance of adapting treatment for complex patients and shows that PAE can be safe and effective in such cases.

Alternative access for peripheral vascular interventions

Percutaneous endovascular interventions for advanced lower extremity peripheral arterial disease are becoming increasingly used, often as first-line treatment of chronic limb threatening ischemia. Advancements in endovascular techniques have provided safe and effective alternative revascularization options, especially for high-risk surgical patients. Although the classic transfemoral approach results in high technical success and patency rates, an estimated 20% of lesions remain challenging to access via an antegrade approach. As such, alternative access sites are important in the endovascular armamentarium for the management of chronic limb threatening ischemia. The goal of this review is to discuss alternative access sites, specifically the transradial, transpopliteal, and transpedal approaches, in addition to transbrachial and transaxillary access, and their outcomes in peripheral arterial disease and limb salvage.

Single Primary Retrograde Access to Treat Femoro-Popliteal Occlusive Lesions

INTRODUCTION

The retrograde puncture of a distal artery is considered a bailout procedure in case of anterograde approach failure for peripheral artery disease (PAD) treatment. A single primary retrograde access has been suggested as an efficient and safe option. As scant data are available, we present our results using this approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between August 2019 and October 2022, we performed this technique in selected patients with femoro-popliteal PAD. Chronic total occlusions (CTOs) were selected on the basis of the CTOP classification. An ultrasound-guided retrograde puncture of a tibial artery at the ankle level was performed, followed by the preferential use of 4F materials. Hemostasis of the puncture site was obtained using manual compression. Postoperative duplex scan examination systematically included an evaluation of the punctured artery. Demographics, intraoperative, and follow-up data were collected retrospectively. The results are expressed as means with standard deviations and numbers with percentages when appropriate.

RESULTS

In total, 55 procedures were performed in 46 patients (9 bilateral). Of these, 57% (N=26) were considered at risk for femoral puncture (obesity, history of groin surgery, challenging crossover approach) and 54% (N=25) presented with critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). The TASC-II femoro-popliteal classification was generally B (60%) and also C (33%) or D (7%). Mean lesion length was 105.6±49.4 mm and 65% were CTOs. Most patients were operated in an outpatient setting (N=25; 54%) under potentialized local anesthesia (N=41, 89%). The punctured site was the posterior tibial artery in 73% (N=40). The procedure time was 65.1±25.7 minutes, and the fluoroscopy time was 10.7±8.5 minutes. The technical success rate was 100%. There were no intraoperative complications. All patients could walk the same day. One CLTI patient presented an erysipelas related to the puncture in postoperative period. At 30 days, the primary patency of the treated and the punctured arteries were 98% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A single primary retrograde access can be used safely to treat femoro-popliteal PAD. It represents a valuable alternative to the femoral puncture and allows fast ambulation. Prospective and long-term studies on larger populations are necessary to confirm our results.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study demonstrates that a single primary retrograde access can be used safely without damaging the punctured artery to treat femoro-popliteal lesions, especially in claudicant patients. Chronic total occlusions can be treated successfully using this technique. This approach represents a valuable alternative to the femoral puncture and allows fast ambulation without risk of major bleeding.

Radial access for peripheral vascular intervention: the S.M.A.R.T. RADIANZ Vascular Stent System

INTRODUCTION

Radial access is the standard of care for nearly all cardiac catheterization procedures. It improves patient satisfaction, reduces the length of stay, and is associated with fewer complications. However, few devices and tools are available for the treatment of peripheral arterial disease via a transradial approach (TRA). The S.M.A.R.T. RADIANZ Vascular Stent System is among the RADIANZ suite of products, which is aimed at expanding the portfolio of devices to treat peripheral arterial disease.

AREAS COVERED

In this Expert review, the following areas will be covered: (1) Current Landscape of peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) using TRA (2) Detailed description of the S.M.A.R.T. RADIANZ Vascular Stent System. (3) Ongoing clinical trials to evaluate safety of this approach. (4) Future directions and current regulatory status.

EXPERT OPINION

TRA for PVI is a promising approach. It holds the possibility of substantially improving the care of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Numerous challenges must be overcome to realize the full potential of a radial-to-peripheral (RTP) approach. The length of devices and the small sheath size are the main constraints of this approach. The results of the ongoing RADIANCY trial will demonstrate the safety, in selected patients, of the RADIANZ suite of products.