Procedural Feasibility and Peri-procedural Outcomes of Peripheral Endovascular Therapy via Transradial versus Transfemoral Access: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of transradial access for peripheral vascular interventions.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and Embase.

REVIEW METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched to June 2023 to identify studies investigating the outcomes of lower extremity, carotid, and visceral artery vascular interventions via transradial vs. transfemoral access. The primary outcome was procedural failure rate. Secondary outcomes were total access site complications, minor and major bleeding, stroke, access vessel occlusion, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume.

RESULTS

Eight randomised controlled trials and 29 observational studies yielded a total of 70 882 patients treated via transradial (n = 2 616) vs. transfemoral access (n = 68 338). The overall failure rate was 2.3 ± 0.7%, and the transradial approach was associated with a statistically significantly higher procedural failure rate than the transfemoral approach (3.9 ± 0.7% vs. 1.0 ± 0.3%; odds ratio [OR] 3.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.84 - 5.12; I2 = 32%; p < .001). Subgroup analysis showed the highest failure rate in lower extremity interventions with 12.4 ± 4.9% for transradial vs. 4.0 ± 1.2% for transfemoral access. Conversely, procedural complications were statistically significantly fewer with transradial access for total access site complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45 - 0.91; I2 = 36%; p = .010). Minor bleeding was statistically significantly less with the transradial approach (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 - 0.86; I2 = 30%; p = .010), whereas major bleeding and stroke rates were similar. Transradial access had more access vessel occlusion than transfemoral access (1.9% ± 0.5% vs. < 0.1% ± 0.0%; p = .004), although most remained asymptomatic. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume were all comparable. GRADE certainty was low to moderate in most outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The transradial approach was associated with a higher procedural failure rate. Total access site complications and minor bleeding were lower with the transradial approach, albeit with more frequent access vessel occlusion. Transradial access may be a feasible and safe approach; however, appropriate patient selection is imperative.

Safety and efficacy of the Mynx Control vascular closure device in peripheral arterial procedures: A prospective study

OBJECTIVES

This article aims to present a prospective study investigating the safety and efficacy of the Mynx Control extravascular closure device (Cordis Corporation, FL, USA), for femoral arterial closure in patients undergoing peripheral arterial procedures.

METHODS

Between January 2020 and February 2021, 100 Mynx Control devices were deployed in 91 consecutive patients (mean age: 67.5 ± 16.9 years) who underwent peripheral arterial procedures. We used ultrasound and/or fluoroscopy during Mynx Control deployment and ultrasound post-procedure to detect complications. Femoral artery punctures included 62 (62%) antegrade and 38 (38%) retrograde punctures. The mean activated clotting time at time of device deployment was 221s. The primary endpoints were technical success, device failure, and complication rates up to 30 days.

RESULTS

A 5F vascular sheath was used in 43 cases (43%) (36 (36%) 6F and 21 (21%) 7F). The majority of our cases had antegrade access (62%). Overall technical success rate was 97% in both antegrade and retrograde cases. In total, there were 4 minor complications: 3 (3%) cases of pseudoaneurysm and 1 (1%) case of haematoma. No major complications were recorded post-procedure or 30 days post index procedure.

CONCLUSION

The Mynx Control vascular closure device is safe and effective in achieving haemostasis in patients undergoing antegrade and retrograde peripheral angioplasty procedures.

Imaging-Guided Deployment of a Balloon-Based Vascular Closure Device in Routine Clinical Practice

This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of imaging-guided deployment of a Mynx Control device (Cordis, Miami Lakes, Florida) at the femoral access. A total of 201 Mynx devices were used under imaging guidance in 137 patients (mean age, 64.18 years ± 13.8; male, 68.6%) between June 2020 and February 2022. A 5-F sheath was used in 176 (87.6%) procedures, a 6-F sheath was used in 17 (8.5%) procedures, and a 7-F sheath was used in 8 (4%) procedures. Indicator errors occurred in 9 (4.5%) procedures. However, technical success was achieved via manipulation under imaging guidance in all procedures. The mean time to hemostasis was 3.3 minutes ± 0.5, and the clinical success rate was 100%. The mean length of hospital stay was 7 days ± 7.5. After 4 (2%) procedures, small hematomas reabsorbed spontaneously. Imaging-guided deployment of a Mynx Control device is a feasible and safe option for access site closure. Even after an indicator error, successful hemostasis was achieved via real-time interaction.

Utilisation of Image Guidance to Enhance Safety of Deployment of the Mynx Control Vascular Closure Device

The Mynx Control device (Cardinal Healthcare, Dublin, Ohio, USA) was recently licensed and allows for entirely extravascular arteriotomy closure. It uses a polyethylene glycol sealant plug which is absorbed fully within 30 days, alleviating concerns around difficulties with regaining access in future. The Mynx device uses a balloon, inflated within the artery and retracted against the arteriotomy to achieve haemostasis, with the extravascular sealant plug then deployed outside the vessel wall. While the manufacturer's instructions for use do not include utilisation of imaging guidance, we routinely employ fluoroscopic and/or ultrasound to ensure safe use of the device. These techniques allow confirmation of balloon position against the arteriotomy, hence avoiding inadvertent deployment of the plug partially or fully intraluminally. Visualisation of the balloon within the lumen also eliminates risk of plaque disruption in diseased vessels on retraction of the device. Image guidance adds little time to device deployment, and the safety benefits are such that we recommend that practitioners elsewhere consider adopting our techniques. Here, we describe the process involved in both techniques.