Safety and Feasibility of Transradial Access for Visceral Interventions in Patients with Thrombocytopenia

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.

Retrospective Comparative Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Transradial Arterial Access for Hepatic Tumor Embolizations: A Single Operator Experience

Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of transradial arterial access (TRA) for hepatic tumor embolizations and compare the outcomes between the TRA and transfemoral arterial access (TFA)

Materials and Methods A retrospective analysis of all consecutive hepatic tumor embolization procedures done through TFA or TRA by a single operator from November 2017 to April 2019 was performed. The procedural variables, including fluoroscopy time, radiation dose (reference air kerma [RAK]), conversion and complication rates, and patient preferences were recorded. The primary endpoint was technical success, which was defined as the successful completion of the embolization procedure. Procedural variables including radiation exposure and patient preferences, and complications were analyzed as secondary endpoints.

Results Out of 102 procedures in 90 patients, 44 were performed through TFA and the rest by TRA. A technical success rate of 98.2% and a crossover rate of 1.7% were recorded for TRA. There were no major vascular complications and similar rates of minor complications (8.6% for TRA, 2.3% for TFA; P = 0.055), without any clinical sequelae. After the initial learning curve, no significant differences for other procedural variables were noted between the two access sites. Faster ambulation were achieved following TRA (P < 0.055). All 12 patients who underwent repeat TACE after initial TRA chose this again over TFA.

Conclusions TRA is safe and effective for hepatic tumor embolization. Its safety and efficacy profile is comparable to that of TFA, with added improved patient comfort and faster ambulation.

Advances in Knowledge New catheter options and modifications of the existing techniques as explained in this article proved radial arterial access as a safe and effective alternative in hepatic arterial embolization.

Transradial Access: A Comprehensive Review

Transradial access (TRA) via the left radial artery is an alternative to traditional transfemoral access for catheter-based procedures that is becoming increasingly more relevant in all types of arterial vascular interventions. First investigated in the realm of cardiology, TRA has been proven to provide many benefits (such as lower complication rates, lower cost, and improved patient comfort during and after the procedure) when compared with traditional femoral access while maintaining efficacy. This article provides an in-depth summary of the technical aspects of radial access while incorporating more recent data to explain patient preference for TRA, and the ways that TRA can improve peri-procedure workflow and compensation. It also describes potential complications, such as radial artery spasm, difficult anatomic variants and radial artery occlusion, and then gives techniques for mitigating and treating these complications. The article explains why TRA has become an important option for vascular and interventional radiology physicians, and why it is likely that this will continue to grow in relevance.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count

BACKGROUND

People with thrombocytopenia often require a surgical procedure. A low platelet count is a relative contraindication to surgery due to the risk of bleeding. Platelet transfusions are used in clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people with thrombocytopenia. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to surgery. Alternatives to platelet transfusion are also used prior surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following major data bases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), PubMed (e-publications only), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the Transfusion Evidence Library and ongoing trial databases to 11 December 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-RCTs and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs), that met Cochrane EPOC (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care) criteria, that involved the transfusion of platelets prior to surgery (any dose, at any time, single or multiple) in people with low platelet counts. We excluded studies on people with a low platelet count who were actively bleeding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for data collection. We were only able to combine data for two outcomes and we presented the rest of the findings in a narrative form.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five RCTs, all conducted in adults; there were no eligible non-randomised studies. Three completed trials enrolled 180 adults and two ongoing trials aim to include 627 participants. The completed trials were conducted between 2005 and 2009. The two ongoing trials are scheduled to complete recruitment by October 2019. One trial compared prophylactic platelet transfusions to no transfusion in people with thrombocytopenia in an intensive care unit (ICU). Two small trials, 108 participants, compared prophylactic platelet transfusions to other alternative treatments in people with liver disease. One trial compared desmopressin to fresh frozen plasma or one unit of platelet transfusion or both prior to surgery. The second trial compared platelet transfusion prior to surgery with two types of thrombopoietin mimetics: romiplostim and eltrombopag. None of the included trials were free from methodological bias. No included trials compared different platelet count thresholds for administering a prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to surgery. None of the included trials reported on all the review outcomes and the overall quality per reported outcome was very low.None of the three completed trials reported: all-cause mortality at 90 days post surgery; mortality secondary to bleeding, thromboembolism or infection; number of red cell or platelet transfusions per participant; length of hospital stay; or quality of life.None of the trials included children or people who needed major surgery or emergency surgical procedures.Platelet transfusion versus no platelet transfusion (1 trial, 72 participants)We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery had any effect on all-cause mortality within 30 days (1 trial, 72 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.45; very-low quality evidence). We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery had any effect on the risk of major (1 trial, 64 participants; RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.29 to 8.92; very low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (1 trial, 64 participants; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85; very-low quality evidence). No serious adverse events occurred in either study arm (1 trial, 72 participants, very low-quality evidence).Platelet transfusion versus alternative to platelet transfusion (2 trials, 108 participants)We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery compared to an alternative has any effect on the risk of major (2 trials, 108 participants; no events; very low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (desmopressin: 1 trial, 36 participants; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.23; very-low quality evidence: thrombopoietin mimetics: 1 trial, 65 participants; no events; very-low quality evidence). We were very uncertain whether there was a difference in transfusion-related adverse effects between the platelet transfused group and the alternative treatment group (desmopressin: 1 trial, 36 participants; RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.12 to 62.17; very-low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this review were based on three small trials involving minor surgery in adults with thrombocytopenia. We found insufficient evidence to recommend the administration of preprocedure prophylactic platelet transfusions in this situation with a lack of evidence that transfusion resulted in a reduction in postoperative bleeding or all-cause mortality. The small number of trials meeting the inclusion criteria and the limitation in reported outcomes across the trials precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes. Further adequately powered trials, in people of all ages, of prophylactic platelet transfusions compared with no transfusion, other alternative treatments, and considering different platelet thresholds prior to planned and emergency surgical procedures are required. Future trials should include major surgery and report on bleeding, adverse effects, mortality (as a long-term outcome) after surgery, duration of hospital stay and quality of life measures.

Transradial versus Transfemoral Access for Hepatic Chemoembolization: Intrapatient Prospective Single-Center Study

PURPOSE

To compare transfemoral approach (TFA) and transradial approach (TRA) in patients undergoing hepatic chemoembolization in terms of safety, feasibility, and procedural variables, including fluoroscopy time, radiation dose (reference air kerma [RAK]), and patient preference.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center prospective intrapatient comparative study was conducted with 42 consecutive patients with hepatic malignancies who received 2 consecutive treatment sessions of unilobar hepatic chemoembolization within a 4-week interval over a 6-month period with both TRA and TFA. All procedures were performed by 1 interventional radiologist who assessed the eligibility of patients for inclusion in the study. The primary endpoint was intraprocedural conversion rate. Secondary endpoints were access site complications, angiographic and procedural variables, and evaluation of patient discomfort and preferences.

RESULTS

A 100% technical success rate and a crossover rate of 0% were recorded. There were no major vascular complications and similar rates of minor complications (4.8% for TRA, 7.1% for TFA; P = .095), which were self-limited and without any clinical sequelae. TRA treatments required a significantly longer preparation time for the procedure (P = .008) with no significant differences for other procedural variables. Greater discomfort at the access route and patient inability to perform basic activities after the procedure were recorded for TFA (P < .001). TRA was preferred by 35 patients (35/42) for potential future transarterial procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

TRA is safe and feasible for transarterial hepatic chemoembolization, with high technical success, low overall complications, and improved patient comfort.

Transradial Access for Interventional Radiology: Single-Centre Procedural and Clinical Outcome Analysis

PURPOSE

The study sought to describe a single centre's technical approach to transradial intervention and report on clinical outcomes and safety.

METHODS

A total of 749 transradial access (TRA) procedures were performed at a single hospital in 562 patients (174 women and 388 men). Procedures included 445 bland embolizations or chemoembolizations of the liver, 88 uterine artery embolizations, and 148 procedures for Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (Y90), which included mapping and administration. The mean age of the patients was 62 years (range 27-96 years).

RESULTS

Four cases (0.5%) required crossover to transfemoral (tortuous anatomy, inability to secure a stable position for embolization, vessel spasm and base catheter not being of a sufficient length). A single asymptomatic, short-segment radial artery occlusion occurred (0.3%), 3 patients (0.4%) developed small hematomas postprocedurally, and 2 patients (0.7%) had transient neurological pain, which was resolved within a week without treatment. It was found that 98% of patients who had a previous femoral access procedure would choose radial access for subsequent procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Transradial access is a safe, effective technique, with a learning curve; however, this procedure has the potential to significantly improve departmental workflow and cost savings for the department and patient experience.

Transradial Approach for Hepatic Radioembolization: Initial Results and Technique

OBJECTIVE

The transradial approach (TRA) has been shown to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with arterial coronary interventions. Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) performed via the TRA can enhance patient comfort, compared with the traditional transfemoral approach (TFA), by allowing immediate ambulation and precluding potential complications associated with the TFA, such as closure device injury or retroperitoneal hematoma. We report our initial experience with and technique for using the TRA for SIRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between May 1, 2012, and April 30, 2015, a total of 574 procedures, including planning angiograms (n = 329) and infusions of ⁹⁰Y (n = 245), were performed for 318 patients (mean age, 64.5 years). Of the 245 patients who received ⁹⁰Y infusions, 52 had SIRT performed with the use of a permanent single-use implant of ⁹⁰Y resin microspheres and 193 had SIRT performed with the use of millions of small glass microspheres containing radioactive ⁹⁰Y. Procedural details, technical success, the radial artery (RA) occlusion rate noted at 30 days (as assessed via pulse examination), and the major and minor adverse events noted at 30 days were evaluated.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 561 of 574 cases (97.7%). The reasons for crossover to use of the TFA included an RA loop (n = 2), RA occlusion (n = 9), and type D response as determined by use of a Barbeau test (n = 2). Patients had undergone between zero and six previous TRA procedures. The mortality rate at 30 days was 0%. Superficial bruising occurred in 13 of 574 cases (2.3%). A grade 2 hematoma that required a second nonocclusive hemostasis cuff occurred in one case. Transient forearm numbness or pain occurred in two of 574 cases. One patient had a transient convulsive event occur after receiving intraarterial infusion of verapamil. RA occlusion occurred in nine of 574 cases (1.6%).

CONCLUSION

Use of the TRA for SIRT is safe, feasible, and well tolerated and is associated with high rates of technical success and rare complications.