A Comparative Analysis between Ultrasound-Guided and Conventional Distal Transradial Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention

Ultrasound-guided modified dynamic needle tip positioning technique for distal radial artery catheterization: A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The distal radial artery presents a particular challenge for puncture and catheterization due to its diminutive size, tortuous path, and tendency to spasm, increasing the risk of procedural failure and injury. Ultrasound guidance improves success rates and reduces risk in radial artery catheterization. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of a refined dynamic needle tip positioning technique for distal radial artery access.

METHODS

One hundred twelve patients were randomized to either the modified dynamic needle tip positioning technique (MDNTP) or palpation guidance groups (palpation group), each with 56 participants. The primary outcomes were the success rate of the initial puncture and overall puncture success rate, while secondary outcomes included procedural time and complications such as puncture site hematoma and radial artery occlusion within 24 h.

RESULTS

The MDNTP group exhibited superior initial puncture success (71.43% vs 46.43%, p < 0.05) and fewer puncture attempts (median 1 (1, 2) vs 2 (1, 4), p < 0.05), resulting in a higher overall puncture success rate (98.21% vs 87.50%, p = 0.028). Notably, sheath insertion times were significantly shorter (17 (12, 21) s vs 57 (32, 100) s, p = 0.001) and the Sheath insertion success rate was higher (96.43% vs 82.14%, p = 0.015) in the MDNTP group. Furthermore, the incidence of puncture site hematomas was reduced (5.36% vs 19.64%, p = 0.022), although puncture time was longer (60 (28, 116) s vs 40 (15, 79) s, p = 0.033). Despite these differences, total procedural time and the incidence of radial artery occlusion at 24 h postoperatively were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The MDNTP technique boosts the success of distal radial artery puncture and catheterization, reducing the risk of complications associated with the procedure.

Successful creation and long-term usage of radiocephalic fistula based on the recanalized completely occluded radial artery

The total occlusion of radial artery is a contraindication for reintervention and further usage. In this study, we report successful revascularization with creation of radiocephalic fistula from post-procedural chronically-occluded radial artery. The completely occluded radial artery was recanalized through ultrasound guided balloon angioplasty. A traditional radiocephalic fistula was created subsequently by using the recanalized radial artery for hemodialysis therapy. Though the fistula was failed at the 6 weeks caused by the juxta anastomotic stenosis, the further ultrasound guided percutaneous transluminal angioplasty restored the blood, and the hemodialysis therapy lasts for more than 1 year so far. It's feasible to create radiocephalic fistula based on the recanalized radial artery and maintain long-term hemodialysis therapy.

Ultrasound Guidance for Transradial Access in the Cardiac Catheterisation Laboratory: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although ultrasound (US) guidance for vascular access has been widely adopted, its use for transradial access (TRA) in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory is rare. There is a perception that US guidance does not offer a clinically relevant benefit over traditional palpation-guided TRA, amplified by inconsistent findings of individual studies.

METHOD

A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library identified studies comparing US to palpation-guided TRA for cardiac catheterisation. Studies evaluating radial artery (RA) cannulation for any other reason were excluded. Event rates and risk ratios (RRs) were pooled for meta-analysis. Access failure was the primary outcome. A random-effects model was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 977 records screened, four studies with a total of 1,718 patients (861 US-guided and 864 palpation-guided procedures) were included in the meta-analysis. Most procedures were elective. The pooled analysis showed US guidance significantly lowered the risk of access failure (RR 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.97; p=0.04). Heterogeneity was moderate (I2=51.2%; p=0.105). There was a strong trend to improved first-pass success with US (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.00-1.66; p=0.05; I2=83.8%), although no differences were found in rates of difficult access (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.07-1.18; p=0.09; I2=88.3%). Salvage US guidance was successful in 30/41 (73.2%) patients following failed palpation-guided TRA. No differences were found in already low complication rates including RA spasm (RR 1.18; 95% CI 0.70-1.99; p=0.53; I2=0.0%) and bleeding (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.46-3.80; p=0.60; I2=0.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

US guidance was found to improve TRA success in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Further investigation is necessary to determine whether routine, selective, or salvage use of US confers the most RA protection, patient satisfaction, and overall clinical benefit. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022332238).

Distal Versus Proximal Radial Arterial Access for Percutaneous Coronary Angiography and Intervention: Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Radial artery occlusion (RAO) is a major impediment to reintervention in patients who underwent proximal transradial access (p-TRA) for coronary catheterization. Distal transradial access (d-TRA) at the level of snuffbox distal to the radial artery bifurcation is a novel alternative to p-TRA. We conducted an updated meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the incidence of RAO between p-TRA and d-TRA, along with access site-related complications. PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for RCTs published since 2017 to October 2023 comparing d-TRA and p-TRA for coronary angiography and/or intervention. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model for procedural and clinical outcomes for the 2 approaches. A total of 18 RCTs with 8,205 patients (d-TRA n = 4,096, p-TRA n = 4,109) were included. The risk of RAO (RR 0.31, 0.21 to 0.46, p ≤0.001) and time to hemostasis (minutes) (MD -51.18, -70.62 to -31.73, p <0.001) was significantly lower in the d-TRA group. Crossover rates (RR 2.39, 1.71 to 3.32, p <0.001), access time (minutes) (MD 0.93, 0.50 to 1.37, p <0.001), procedural pain (MD 0.46, 0.13 to 0.79, p = 0.006), and multiple puncture attempts (RR 2.13, 1.10 to 4.11, p = 0.03) were significantly higher in the d-TRA group. The use of d-TRA for coronary angiography and/or intervention is associated with a lower risk of RAO at the forearm and may preserve p-TRA site for reintervention in selective patients by reducing the incidence of RAO.

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.

Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Coronary Catheterization through Distal Transradial Access: A Single-Center Data

Background and Aims

The distal transradial access (dTRA) is a new puncture site for coronary catheterization. We sought to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and complication rates of using the dTRA for cardiac catheterization in Chinese patients.

Methods

A total of 263 consecutive patients who underwent catheterization through the dTRA were enrolled. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of conversion to another access site due to the impossibility of successful artery puncture or intubation. Secondary safety endpoints were the rates of bleeding-related complications and nerve disorders.

Results

Among 263 patients, the puncture success rate was 96.2% (253/263). Eleven patients were successfully punctured, but the guide wire was difficult to advance. One patient had intubation failure, and the success rate of intubation was 91.6% (241/263). Two hundred thirty-three patients underwent puncture via the right dTRA, 5 patients underwent puncture via the left dTRA, and 3 patients underwent puncture via the bilateral dTRA. A total of 158 (65.6%) patients underwent coronary angiography, and 83 (34.4%) patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. After the procedure, only 2 (0.8%) patients had mild bleeding at the puncture site, 2 (0.8%) had a forearm hematoma, and no patient had a nerve disorder.

Conclusions

DTRA has a low incidence of complications, making it a safe and effective technique for cardiac catheterization.

Predictors of success and puncture site complications in the distal radial approach

The distal radial approach (DRA) has been proposed as an alternative approach for coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, the predictors of DRA failure and puncture site complications are unclear. Among 7153 consecutive patients undergoing CAG or PCI between November 2018 and January 2021, 3610 patients undergoing CAG or PCI with DRA were analyzed. The primary endpoint of this study was the procedural success, and the secondary endpoint of this study was puncture site complications during procedure. Puncture site complications during procedure were defined as a composite of major bleeding, minor bleeding, arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, and neuropathy. The DRA success rate and the puncture site complication rate were 90.4% and 7.7%, respectively. The predictors of DRA failure were low body weight and dual antiplatelet therapy; those of DRA success were PCI and ultrasonography-guided DRA; those of puncture site complications during procedure were low body weight, peripheral arterial disease, dual antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulant therapy, and PCI; and that of no puncture site complications were previous PCI and ultrasonography-guided DRA. The negative predictors of DRA success with no puncture site complication during procedure were low body weight and dual antiplatelet therapy. The positive predictor of DRA success with no puncture site complication during procedure was ultrasonography-guided DRA. We identified the predictors of DRA failure and puncture site complications during procedure in patients undergoing CAG and PCI with DRA. Ultrasonography-guided DRA was associated with a high DRA success rate and a low puncture site complication rate in patients undergoing CAG or PCI with DRA.

Ultrasound-guided distal transradial access for cardiac catheterization: Technical notes for the interventionalist

Over the latest years, the use of distal radial access (dTRA), also called "snuffbox," has become more and more popular for cardiac catheterization. Indeed, dTRA has several advantages compared to the traditional proximal radial approach, such as a lower risk of hand ischemia, radial artery occlusion (RAO) and faster post-procedural hemostasis. However, due to the presence of different muscular-skeletal structures, as well as to the small diameter of the distal radial artery (dRA), an ultrasound-guided cannulation would be preferred since a blind puncture increases the risk of tendon damage and/or the irritation of the underlying periosteum. The present article is aimed to provide the key tips for performing US-guided access using the dRA in patients undergoing percutaneous cardiac procedures.

The Role of Ultrasound in Accessing the Distal Radial Artery at the Anatomical Snuffbox for Cardiovascular Interventions

In an effort to refine transcatheter vascular interventions, radial artery access has moved more distally at the anatomical snuffbox. Here, more challenges appear as the artery is smaller, more angulated, and more difficult to palpate. Including ultrasound guidance as a mandatory step during puncture may encourage more operators to switch to this approach. In the femoral approach, ultrasound guidance is strongly recommended because of bleeding complications, whereas in the proximal (conventional) radial approach, the role of ultrasound remains optional, and in current practice, almost all cases are performed by palpation of the pulse only. However, in distal radial access, the situation is different because the artery differs in caliber and position, and imaging can help the operator for a clean puncture, especially since repeated punctures are not only painful but also any hematoma formation leads to the complete compression of the artery and failure of access. The aim of this review is to investigate the rationale of vascular ultrasound during distal radial access and to establish some techniques and anatomical landmarks for the ultrasonographic exploration of the dorsal area of the hand.

Application of ultrasound in cardiovascular intervention via the distal radial artery approach: New wine in old bottles?

The distal radial artery (DRA) approach has emerged as a new approach in cardiovascular intervention. In recent years, ultrasound has been widely used in cardiovascular intervention via the DRA approach. This article systematically discusses the progress of ultrasound in the preoperative vascular assessment, intraoperative guided puncture and postoperative observation of complications via the DRA approach.

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.

Distal radial artery as an alternative approach to forearm radial artery for perioperative blood pressure monitoring: a randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial

BACKGROUND

The novel distal radial artery (dRA) approach is a popular arterial access route for interventional cardiology and neurointerventions. We explored the dRA as an alternative site to the classic forearm radial artery (RA) for perioperative blood pressure monitoring. We hypothesized that dRA catheterization is noninferior to RA for the first attempt success rate.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled, noninferiority study. Adult patients who underwent elective surgery at the Jinling Hospital from May 2021 to August 2021 were enrolled. The primary endpoint was to test the noninferiority of the first attempt success rate between the groups. Secondary endpoints included anatomical characteristics, catheterization time, arterial posterior wall puncture rate, postoperative compression time, dampened arterial pressure waveforms, and complications.

RESULTS

Totally, 161 patients who received either dRA (n = 81) or RA (n = 80) catheterization were analyzed. The first attempt success rates were 87.7 and 91.3% in the dRA and RA groups, respectively, with a mean difference of - 3.6% (95% CI, - 13.1 to 5.9%). The dRA diameter and cross-sectional area were significantly smaller than those of the RA (P < 0.001). The subcutaneous depth of dRA was significantly greater than that of the RA (P < 0.001). The dRA had a longer catheterization time (P = 0.008) but a shorter postoperative compression time (P < 0.001). The arterial posterior wall puncture rate of dRA was significantly higher than that of the RA (P = 0.006). The dRA had fewer dampened arterial waveforms than RA (P = 0.030) perioperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The dRA is a rational alternative approach to RA for perioperative arterial pressure monitoring and provides a noninferior first attempt success rate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered in the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (registration number: ChiCTR2100043714 , registration date: 27/02/2021).

Comparison of the Safety, Efficacy, and Procedural Characteristics Associated with Proximal and Distal Radial Access for Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography

OBJECTIVES

Radial access is an increasingly popular approach for performing cerebral angiography. There are two sites for radial artery puncture: proximal transradial access (pTRA) in the wrist and distal transradial access (dTRA) in the snuffbox. These approaches have not been directly compared.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive diagnostic cerebral angiograms performed at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes included fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, contrast volume, time to obtain access, procedure duration, and time to discharge home. Success rates as well as minor and major complication rates associated with each approach were also compared. Multivariate linear regression models were used to determine the relationship between access site and outcomes while adjusting for covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 287 angiograms on 244 patients met the inclusion criteria. pTRA was associated with shorter fluoroscopy time (ß -2.54, 95% CI -4.18 - -0.9, p = 0.003) and lower radiation dose (ß -242.89, 95% CI -351.55 - -134.24, p < 0.001), but not contrast volume. Time to obtain access, procedure duration, and time to discharge home were similar between approaches. A total of 10 minor complications occurred with similar rates for each approach (8 for dTRA, 2 for pTRA, p = 0.168) and there were no major complications. The conversion rate to femoral access was low (1.05% overall) and did not differ with approach.

CONCLUSION

dTRA and pTRA are associated with similarly high rates of safety and efficacy. Procedure duration, time to obtain access, and time to discharge did not differ between approaches.

Ultrasound guidance for arterial (other than femoral) catheterisation in adults

BACKGROUND

Arterial vascular access is a frequently performed procedure, with a high possibility for adverse events (e.g. pneumothorax, haemothorax, haematoma, amputation, death), and additional techniques such as ultrasound may be useful for improving outcomes. However, ultrasound guidance for arterial access in adults is still under debate.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of ultrasound guidance for arterial (other than femoral) catheterisation in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL on 21 May 2021. We also searched IBECS, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 16 June 2021, and we checked the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cross-over trials and cluster-RCTs, comparing ultrasound guidance, alone or associated with other forms of guidance, versus other interventions or palpation and landmarks for arterial (other than femoral) guidance in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 48 studies (7997 participants) that tested palpation and landmarks, Doppler auditory ultrasound assistance (DUA), direct ultrasound guidance with B-mode, or any other modified ultrasound technique for arterial (axillary, dorsalis pedis, and radial) catheterisation in adults. Radial artery Real-time B-mode ultrasound versus palpation and landmarks Real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance may improve first attempt success rate (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29 to 1.61; 4708 participants, 27 studies; low-certainty evidence) and overall success rate (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.16; 4955 participants, 28 studies; low-certainty evidence), and may decrease time needed for a successful procedure (mean difference (MD) -0.33 minutes, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.13; 4902 participants, 26 studies; low-certainty evidence) up to one hour compared to palpation and landmarks. Real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance probably decreases major haematomas (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.56; 2504 participants, 16 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance has any effect on pseudoaneurysm, pain, and quality of life (QoL) compared to palpation and landmarks (very low-certainty evidence). Real-time B-mode ultrasound versus DUA One study (493 participants) showed that real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance probably improves first attempt success rate (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.64; moderate-certainty evidence) and time needed for a successful procedure (MD -1.57 minutes, 95% CI -1.78 to -1.36; moderate-certainty evidence) up to 72 hours compared to DUA. Real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance may improve overall success rate (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.29; low-certainty evidence) up to 72 hours compared to DUA. Pseudoaneurysm, major haematomas, pain, and QoL were not reported. Real-time B-mode ultrasound versus modified real-time B-mode ultrasound Real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance may decrease first attempt success rate (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.84; 153 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), may decrease overall success rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; 153 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), and may lead to no difference in time needed for a successful procedure (MD 0.04 minutes, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.09; 153 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) up to one hour compared to modified real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance. It is uncertain whether real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance has any effect on major haematomas compared to modified real-time B-mode ultrasound (very low-certainty evidence). Pseudoaneurysm, pain, and QoL were not reported. In-plane versus out-of-plane B-mode ultrasound In-plane real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance may lead to no difference in overall success rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.05; 1051 participants, 8 studies; low-certainty evidence) and in time needed for a successful procedure (MD -0.06 minutes, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.05; 1134 participants, 9 studies; low-certainty evidence) compared to out-of-plane B-mode ultrasound up to one hour. It is uncertain whether in-plane real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance has any effect on first attempt success rate or major haematomas compared to out-of-plane B-mode ultrasound (very low-certainty evidence). Pseudoaneurysm, pain, and QoL were not reported. DUA versus palpation and landmarks DUA may lead to no difference in first attempt success rate (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.14; 666 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) or overall success rate (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07; 666 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) and probably increases time needed for a successful procedure (MD 0.45 minutes, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.70; 500 participants, 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence) up to 72 hours compared to palpation and landmarks. Pseudoaneurysm, major haematomas, pain, and QoL were not reported. Oblique-axis versus long-axis in-plane B-mode ultrasound Oblique-axis in-plane B-mode ultrasound guidance may increase overall success rate (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.53; 215 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) up to 72 hours compared to long-axis in-plane B-mode ultrasound. It is uncertain whether oblique-axis in-plane B-mode ultrasound guidance has any effect on first attempt success rate, time needed for a successful procedure, and major haematomas compared to long-axis in-plane B-mode ultrasound. Pseudoaneurysm, pain, and QoL were not reported. We are uncertain about effects in the following comparisons due to very low-certainty evidence and unreported outcomes: real-time B-mode ultrasound versus palpation and landmarks (axillary and dorsalis pedis arteries), real-time B-mode ultrasound versus near-infrared laser (radial artery), and dynamic versus static out-of-plane B-mode ultrasound (radial artery).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance may improve first attempt success rate, overall success rate, and time needed for a successful procedure for radial artery catheterisation compared to palpation, or DUA. In addition, real-time B-mode ultrasound guidance probably decreases major haematomas compared to palpation. However, we are uncertain about the evidence on major haematomas and pain for other comparisons due to very low-certainty evidence and unreported outcomes. We are also uncertain about the effects on pseudoaneurysm and QoL for axillary and dorsalis pedis arteries catheterisation. Given that first attempt success rate and pseudoaneurysm are the most relevant outcomes for people who underwent arterial catheterisation, future studies must measure both. Future trials must be large enough to detect effects, use validated scales, and report longer-term follow-up.

Anatomical snuff box approach for percutaneous coronary interventions - Current status

Anatomical snuff box or distal radial artery approach for various percutaneous coronary angiograms and interventions has gained increased interest in recent years. The main advantage is the ergonomic comfort to the patient as it allows the patient's arm to be in more natural position. The safety and feasibility of this novel approach has been studied in past few years but still the data is limited and the distal radial artery approach has not been included in the guidelines. The present review focuses on the latest evidence, technique, advantages and disadvantages of this distal radial artery access.

Distal Radial Access: Consensus Report of the First Korea-Europe Transradial Intervention Meeting

Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures, transradial access, compared with transfemoral access, is associated with a reduced risk for complications including mortality, especially in higher risk patients. However, transradial access is limited by radial artery occlusion (RAO) that despite being mostly asymptomatic because of the extensive anastomoses between the forearm arteries restricts future use of the same radial artery. Distal radial access (DRA) in the anatomic snuffbox or on the dorsum of the hand has recently gained global popularity as an alternative access route for vascular procedures. A strong anatomic and physiological rationale yields potential for significantly reduced risk for RAO and positive impact on procedural outcome for better patient care. Indeed, currently published studies buttress very low rates of RAO after DRA, hence supporting its development. The authors provide an analysis of the foundation of DRA, provide historical background, and offer a critical review of its current status and future directions. Also, given the limited evidence currently available to properly perform DRA in the real world, consensus opinion on what is considered optimal practice is also presented to supplement this document and enhance the implementation of DRA while minimizing its complications.

Access-site hematoma in distal and conventional transradial access: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Distal transradial access (dTRA) has been recently proposed as an innovative access for coronary procedures and a valuable alternative to conventional transradial access (cTRA). The aim of this study was to assess the safety of dTRA versus cTRA in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary angiography and intervention.

METHODS

In this single-center randomized trial, consecutive patients admitted for stable cardiac condition or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were assigned to dTRA or cTRA. The primary endpoint was an early discharge after transradial stenting of coronary arteries (EASY) grade ≥II access-site hematoma (ASH). Vascular access failure, radial artery occlusion (RAO) at hospital discharge , 30-day rates of death, myocardial infarction, stroke and bleeding not related to coronary artery bypass grafting were considered as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients were included and randomized to dTRA (n=100) or cTRA (n=104). The two populations were similar, except for a higher percentage of ACS in the dTRA than in the cTRA group (38% versus 24%, P=0.022). The rate of EASY grade ≥II ASH was lower in dTRA than in cTRA patients, but the difference was not statistically significant (4% versus 8.4%, respectively, P=0.25). Vascular access failure was more frequent in dTRA patients than in cTRA patients (34% versus 8.7%, P<0.0001). We detected no case of RAO at hospital discharge and similar rates of 30-day adverse events in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DTRA is safe and feasible. When compared to cTRA, dTRA is technically more demanding and limited by more frequent crossover to an alternative vascular access.