Procedural volume and outcomes with radial or femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:954-963. [PMID: 24269362 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052]

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.

Annual Case Volume and One-Year Mortality for Endovascular Treatment in Acute Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND

The association between endovascular treatment (EVT) case volume per hospital and clinical outcomes has been reported, but the exact volume threshold has not been determined. This study aimed to examine the case volume threshold in this context.

METHODS

National audit data on the quality of acute stroke care in patients admitted via emergency department, within 7 days of onset, in hospitals that treated ≥ 10 stroke cases during the audit period were analyzed. Ischemic stroke cases treated with EVT during the last three audits (2013, 2014, and 2016) were selected for the analysis. Annual EVT case volume per hospital was estimated and analyzed as a continuous and a categorical variable (in quartiles). The primary outcome measure was 1-year mortality as a surrogate of 3-month functional outcome. As post-hoc sensitivity analysis, replication of the study results was examined using the 2018 audit data.

RESULTS

We analyzed 1,746 ischemic stroke cases treated with EVT in 120 acute care hospitals. The median annual EVT case volume was 12.0 cases per hospital, and mortality rates at 1 month, 3 months, and 1 year were 12.7%, 16.6%, and 23.3%, respectively. Q3 and Q4 had 33% lower odds of 1-year mortality than Q1. Adjustments were made for predetermined confounders. Annual EVT case volume cut-off value for 1-year mortality was 15 cases per year (P < 0.02). The same cut-off value was replicated in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

Annual EVT case volume was associated with 1-year mortality. The volume threshold per hospital was 15 cases per year.

Prediction of radial crossover in acute coronary syndromes: derivation and validation of the MATRIX score

BACKGROUND

The radial artery is recommended by international guidelines as the default vascular access in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) managed invasively. However, crossover from radial to femoral access is required in 4-10% of cases and has been associated with worse outcomes. No standardised algorithm exists to predict the risk of radial crossover.

AIMS

We sought to derive and externally validate a risk score to predict radial crossover in patients with ACS managed invasively.

METHODS

The derivation cohort consisted of 4,197 patients with ACS undergoing invasive management via the randomly allocated radial access from the MATRIX trial. Using logistic regression, we selected predictors of radial crossover and developed a numerical risk score. External validation was accomplished among 3,451 and 491 ACS patients managed invasively and randomised to radial access from the RIVAL and RIFLE-STEACS trials, respectively.

RESULTS

The MATRIX score (age, height, smoking, renal failure, prior coronary artery bypass grafting, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, Killip class, radial expertise) showed a c-index for radial crossover of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75) in the derivation cohort. Discrimination ability was modest in the RIVAL (c-index: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.59-0.67) and RIFLE-STEACS (c-index: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.57-0.75) cohorts. A cut-off of ≥41 points was selected to identify patients at high risk of radial crossover.

CONCLUSIONS

The MATRIX score is a simple eight-item risk score which provides a standardised tool for the prediction of radial crossover among patients with ACS managed invasively. This tool can assist operators in anticipating and better addressing difficulties related to transradial procedures, potentially improving outcomes.

Access-Site Crossover in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Invasive Management

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of access-site crossover in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management via radial or femoral access.

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the clinical implications of access-site crossover.

METHODS

In the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox)-Access trial, 8,404 patients with acute coronary syndrome were randomized to radial or femoral access. Patients undergoing access-site crossover or successful access site were investigated. Thirty-day coprimary outcomes were a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE]) and a composite of MACE or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding (net adverse clinical events [NACE]).

RESULTS

Access-site crossover occurred in 183 of 4,197 patients (4.4%) in the radial group (mainly to femoral access) and 108 of 4,207 patients (2.6%) in the femoral group (mainly to radial access). In multivariate analysis, the risk for coprimary outcomes was not significantly higher with radial crossover compared with successful radial (MACE: adjusted rate ratio [adjRR]: 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81 to 1.93; p = 0.32; NACE: adjRR: 1.40; 95% CI: 0.94 to 2.06; p = 0.094) or successful femoral access (MACE: adjRR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.81; p = 0.47; NACE: adjRR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.86; p = 0.24). Access site-related Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding was higher with radial crossover than successful radial access. Femoral crossover remained associated with higher risks for MACE (adjRR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.87; p = 0.007) and NACE (adjRR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.62; p = 0.019) compared with successful femoral access. Results remained consistent after excluding patients with randomized access not attempted.

CONCLUSIONS

Crossover from radial to femoral access abolishes the bleeding benefit offered by the radial over femoral artery but does not appear to increase the risk for MACE or NACE compared with successful radial or femoral access. (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox [MATRIX]; NCT01433627).

Improved in-hospital outcome for radial access in a large contemporary cohort of primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Background

Randomised controlled trials have shown diverse results for radial access in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). Moreover, it is questionable whether radial access improves outcome in patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing PPCI. We aimed to investigate the outcome according to access site in patients with or without cardiogenic shock, in daily clinical practice.

Methods

For the present analysis we included 9,980 patients undergoing PPCI between 2012 and 2018, registered in the multi-centre, nationwide registry on PCI for myocardial infarction (MI). In-hospital mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and net adverse clinical events (NACE) until discharge were compared between 4,498 patients with radial (45%) and 5,482 patients with femoral (55%) access.

Results

Radial compared to femoral access was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (3.5% vs. 7.7%; P<0.01). Multivariable logistic regression analysis confirmed reduced in-hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43 to 0.75]. Furthermore, MACE (OR 0.60, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.78) as well as NACE (OR 0.59, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.75) occurred less frequently in patients with radial access. Interaction analysis with cardiogenic shock showed an effect modification, resulting in lower mortality in PCI via radial access in patients without, but no difference in those with cardiogenic shock (OR 1.78, 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.96).

Conclusions

Radial access for patients with acute MI undergoing PPCI is associated with improved survival in a large contemporary cohort of daily practice. However, this beneficial effect is restricted to hemodynamically stable patients.

Temporal Trends in in-Hospital Bleeding and Transfusion in a Contemporary Canadian ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patient Population

Background

Although ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management has evolved substantially over the past decade, its effect on bleeding and transfusion rates are largely unknown in a contemporary population.

Methods

Our study cohort included patients 20 years of age or older who were hospitalized for STEMI between 2007 and 2016 across all Canadian provinces, except Quebec. Unadjusted rates of bleeding and of transfusion during STEMI episodes were calculated overall and for each province according to fiscal year. Patients were stratified into 4 groups according to their bleeding/transfusion. Characteristics, treatment, and outcomes were compared between groups. Multivariate logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between bleeding and transfusion on in-hospital mortality.

Results

Using 108,832 STEMI episodes, rates of in-hospital bleeding and transfusion declined between 2007 and 2016 from 3.9% to 2.8% (P < 0.0001) and 4.7% to 3.8% (P < 0.0001), respectively. However, variation in bleeding and transfusion rates were observed across Canadian provinces. Patients with bleeding or transfusion, were older, female, and had more comorbidities. Compared with patients who did not bleed or receive a transfusion, individuals who bled, were transfused, or bled and were transfused, had higher in-hospital mortality (18.6%, 30.3%, and 30.4%, respectively [P < 0.0001]). The association remained after adjustment: bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-2.4), transfusion (OR, 4.4; 95% CI, 3.9-4.9), and bleeding and transfusion (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 3.2-4.6).

Conclusions

The proportion of Canadian STEMI patients who experienced in-hospital bleeding and transfusion has decreased over the past 9 years. However, patients with bleed or transfusion remain at higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Automated Procedure Logs for Cardiology Fellows: A New Training Paradigm in the Era of Electronic Health Records

BACKGROUND

Procedural experience for residents and fellows is critical for achieving competence, and documentation of procedures performed is required. Procedure logs serve as the record of this experience, but are commonly generated manually, require substantial administrative effort, and cannot be corroborated for accuracy.

OBJECTIVE

We developed and implemented a structured clinical-educational report template (CERT), which automatically generates procedure logs directly from the clinical record.

METHODS

Our CERT aimed to replace the post-procedure note template for our cardiac catheterization laboratory and was incorporated into the electronic health record system. Numbers of documented procedures in automated CERT-derived procedure logs over a 1-year post-intervention period (2018-2019) were compared to manual logs and corrected for clinical volume changes. The CERT's impact on fellowship experience was also assessed.

RESULTS

Automated CERT procedure logs increased weekly procedural documentation over manual procedure logs for total procedures (24.2 ± 6.1 vs 17.1 ± 6.8, P = .007), left heart catheterizations (14.5 ± 3.6 vs 10.8 ± 4.2, P = .039), total procedural elements (40.2 ± 11.4 versus 20.9 ± 12.5, P < .001), and captured procedural details not previously documented. The CERT also reduced self-reported administrative time and improved fellowship experience.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel CERT allows procedure logs to be automatically derived from the clinical record and increased the number of documented procedures, compared to manual logging. This innovation ensures an accurate record of procedural experience and reduces self-reported non-educational administrative time for cardiology fellows.

2020 Focused Update of the 2012 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology for the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

One of the major missions of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology is to publish practice guidelines that are suitable for local use in Taiwan. The ultimate purpose is to continuously improve cardiovascular health care from the implementation of the recommendations in the guidelines. Despite recent improvement of medical care, patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) still carry a high morbidity and mortality. There have been many changes in the concepts of STEMI diagnosis and treatment in recent years. The 2020 focused update of the 2012 guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology for the management of STEMI is an amendment of the 2012 guidelines based on the newest published scientific data. The recommendations in this focused update provide the diagnosis and treatment strategy for STEMI that should be generally implemented in Taiwan. Nevertheless, guidelines never completely replace clinical judgment and medical decision still should be determined individually.

Procedural volume and outcomes in patients undergoing VA-ECMO support

Background

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is increasingly used in patients with critical cardiopulmonary failure. To investigate the association between hospital VA-ECMO procedure volume and outcomes in a large, nationwide registry.

Methods

By using administrative data from the German Federal Health Monitoring System, we analyzed all VA-ECMO procedures performed in Germany from 2013 to 2016 regarding the association of procedural volumes with outcomes and complications.

Results

During the study period, 10,207 VA-ECMO procedures were performed; mean age was 61 years, 43.4% had prior CPR, and 71.2% were male patients. Acute coronary syndrome was the primary diagnosis for VA-ECMO implantation (n = 6202, 60.8%). The majority of implantations (n = 5421) were performed at hospitals in the lowest volume category (≤ 50 implantations per year).

There was a significant association between annualized volume of VA-ECMO procedures and 30-day in-hospital mortality for centers with lower vs. higher volume per year. Multivariable logistic regression showed an increased 30-day in-hospital mortality at hospitals with the lowest volume category (adjusted odds ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–1.27, p = 0.034).

Similarly, higher likelihood for complications was observed at hospitals with lower vs. higher annual VA-ECMO volume (adjusted odds ratio 1.46, 95% CI 1.29–1.66, p = 0.001).

Conclusions

In this analysis of more than 10,000 VA-ECMO procedures for cardiogenic shock, the majority of implantations were performed at hospitals with the lowest annual volume. Thirty-day in-hospital mortality and likelihood for complications were higher at hospitals with the lowest annual VA-ECMO volume.

Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management: A prespecified subgroup analysis from VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART

AIMS

In the Bivalirudin versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated according to Recommended Therapies Registry Trial (VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART), bivalirudin was not superior to unfractionated heparin in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management. We assessed whether the access site had an impact on the primary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding at 180 days and whether it interacted with bivalirudin/unfractionated heparin.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 6006 patients with acute coronary syndrome planned for percutaneous coronary intervention were randomised to either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Arterial access was left to the operator discretion. Overall, 90.5% of patients underwent transradial access and 9.5% transfemoral access. Baseline risk was higher in transfemoral access. The unadjusted hazard ratio for the primary outcome was lower with transradial access (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.67, p<0.001) and remained lower after multivariable adjustment (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.52-0.84, p<0.001). Transradial access was associated with lower risk of death (hazard ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.60, p<0.001) and major bleeding (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.75, p<0.001). There was no interaction between treatment with bivalirudin and access site for the primary endpoint (p=0.976) or major bleeding (p=0.801).

CONCLUSIONS

Transradial access was associated with lower risk of death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding at 180 days. Bivalirudin was not associated with less bleeding, irrespective of access site.

Procedural Volume and Outcomes for Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

During the introduction of transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) in the United States, requirements regarding procedural volume were mandated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a condition of reimbursement. A better understanding of the relationship between hospital volume of TAVR procedures and patient outcomes could inform policy decisions.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry regarding procedural volumes and outcomes from 2015 through 2017. The primary analyses examined the association between hospital procedural volume as a continuous variable and risk-adjusted mortality at 30 days after transfemoral TAVR. Secondary analysis included risk-adjusted mortality according to quartile of hospital procedural volume. A sensitivity analysis was performed after exclusion of the first 12 months of transfemoral TAVR procedures at each hospital.

RESULTS

Of 113,662 TAVR procedures performed at 555 hospitals by 2960 operators, 96,256 (84.7%) involved a transfemoral approach. There was a significant inverse association between annualized volume of transfemoral TAVR procedures and mortality. Adjusted 30-day mortality was higher and more variable at hospitals in the lowest-volume quartile (3.19%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.78 to 3.67) than at hospitals in the highest-volume quartile (2.66%; 95% CI, 2.48 to 2.85) (odds ratio, 1.21; P = 0.02). The difference in adjusted mortality between a mean annualized volume of 27 procedures in the lowest-volume quartile and 143 procedures in the highest-volume quartile was a relative reduction of 19.45% (95% CI, 8.63 to 30.26). After the exclusion of the first 12 months of TAVR procedures at each hospital, 30-day mortality remained higher in the lowest-volume quartile than in the highest-volume quartile (3.10% vs. 2.61%; odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.40).

CONCLUSIONS

An inverse volume-mortality association was observed for transfemoral TAVR procedures from 2015 through 2017. Mortality at 30 days was higher and more variable at hospitals with a low procedural volume than at hospitals with a high procedural volume. (Funded by the American College of Cardiology Foundation National Cardiovascular Data Registry and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons.).

Incidence and outcome of peri-procedural cardiogenic shock: results from the international Euro Heart Survey PCI registry

BACKGROUND

There is a large body of literature on acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. However, very little is known about patients who are initially haemodynamically stable and develop cardiogenic shock during percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

A total of 47,407 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled in the PCI Registry of the Euro Heart Survey Programme. We analysed interventions with peri-procedural complications that were classified as 'shock induced by procedure' on the case report form. Clinical and procedural characteristics as well as hospital outcomes of haemodynamically stable patients who developed cardiogenic shock during percutaneous coronary intervention were evaluated. Patients with haemodynamic instability at presentation prior to intervention were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients (0.2%) developed cardiogenic shock as a complication of percutaneous coronary intervention. The majority of cases comprised acute coronary syndrome (60.3%) with complex lesions (93.1%). Most patients had multi-vessel disease (82.1%) and an ejection fraction less than 40% (58.1%). In the multivariate analysis, left main disease (odds ratio (OR) 9.51), ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (OR 5.31) and multi-vessel disease without left main involvement (OR 3.32) were the strongest independent predictors of peri-procedural cardiogenic shock. Among these patients procedural success was low (66.1%) and in-hospital mortality was very high (39.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world registry the rate of haemodynamically stable patients who developed cardiogenic shock during percutaneous coronary intervention was very low. Patients at a priori high risk were more likely to be affected by this complication. The in-hospital mortality rate of these patients was very high.

Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox (MATRIX) programme was designed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of radial versus femoral access and of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin with optional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with the whole spectrum of acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management. Here we describe the prespecified final 1-year outcomes of the entire programme.

METHODS

MATRIX was a programme of three nested, randomised, multicentre, open-label, superiority trials in patients with acute coronary syndrome in 78 hospitals in Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were simultaneously randomly assigned (1:1) before coronary angiography to radial or femoral access and to bivalirudin, with or without post-percutaneous coronary intervention infusion or unfractionated heparin (one-step inclusion). Patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned (1:1) before coronary angiography to radial or femoral access and, only if deemed eligible to percutaneous coronary intervention after angiography (two-step inclusion), entered the antithrombin type and treatment duration programmes. Randomisation sequences were computer generated, blocked, and stratified by intended new or current use of P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel vs ticagrelor or prasugrel), and acute coronary syndrome type (ST-elevation myocardial infarction, troponin-positive, or troponin-negative non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome). Bivalirudin was given as a bolus of 0·75 mg/kg, followed immediately by an infusion of 1·75 mg/kg per h until completion of percutaneous coronary intervention. Heparin was given at 70-100 units per kg in patients not receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and at 50-70 units per kg in patients receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Clinical follow-up was done at 30 days and 1 year. Co-primary outcomes for MATRIX access and MATRIX antithrombin type were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke up to 30 days; and net adverse clinical events, defined as the composite of non-coronary artery bypass graft-related major bleeding, or major adverse cardiovascular events up to 30 days. The primary outcome for MATRIX treatment duration was the composite of urgent target vessel revascularisation, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events up to 30 days. Analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 11, 2011, and Nov 7, 2014, we randomly assigned 8404 patients to receive radial (4197 patients) or femoral (4207 patients) access. Of these 8404 patients, 7213 were included in the MATRIX antithrombin type study and were randomly assigned to bivalirudin (3610 patients) or heparin (3603 patients). Patients assigned to bivalirudin were included in the MATRIX treatment duration study, and were randomly assigned to post-procedure infusion (1799 patients) or no post-procedure infusion (1811 patients). At 1 year, major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ between patients assigned to radial access compared with those assigned to femoral access (14·2% vs 15·7%; rate ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·80-1·00; p=0·0526), but net adverse clinical events were fewer with radial than with femoral access (15·2% vs 17·2%; 0·87, 0·78-0·97; p=0·0128). Compared with heparin, bivalirudin was not associated with fewer major adverse cardiovascular (15·8% vs 16·8%; 0·94, 0·83-1·05; p=0·28) or net adverse clinical events (17·0% vs 18·4%; 0·91, 0·81-1·02; p=0·10). The composite of urgent target vessel revascularisation, stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events did not differ with or without post-procedure bivalirudin infusion (17·4% vs 17·4%; 0·99, 0·84-1·16; p=0·90).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with acute coronary syndrome, radial access was associated with lower rates of net adverse clinical events compared with femoral access, but not major adverse cardiovascular events at 1 year. Bivalirudin with or without post-procedure infusion was not associated with lower rates of major adverse cardiovascular events or net adverse clinical events. Radial access should become the default approach in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive management.

FUNDING

Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology, The Medicines Company, Terumo, amd Canada Research Chairs Programme.

2018 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology, Taiwan Society of Emergency Medicine and Taiwan Society of Cardiovascular Interventions for the management of non ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome

In Taiwan, the incidence of non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) continues to increase in recent years. The purpose of this guideline is to help health care professionals in Taiwan to use adequate tests and treatments for management of NSTE-ACS. For rapid diagnosis, in addition to history and physical examination, 0/3 h rapid diagnosis protocol with high sensitivity cardiac troponin assay is recommended in this guideline. Dual antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapies are important parts in the initial treatment. Risk stratification should be performed to identify high risk patients for early coronary angiography. Through evaluation of the coronary anatomy and other clinical factors, the decision for coronary revascularization, either by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, should be decided by the heart team. The duration of dual antiplatelet therapy should be given for at least 12 months after discharge. Other secondary preventive medications are also recommended for long term use.

Transradial versus transfemoral approach for diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in people with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the major cause of mortality worldwide. Coronary artery disease (CAD) contributes to half of mortalities caused by CVD. The mainstay of management of CAD is medical therapy and revascularisation. Revascularisation can be achieved via coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Peripheral arteries, such as the femoral or radial artery, provide the access to the coronary arteries to perform diagnostic or therapeutic (or both) procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of the transradial compared to the transfemoral approach in people with CAD undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) or PCI (or both).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials on 10 October 2017: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in August 2017. There were no language restrictions. Reference lists were also checked and we contacted authors of included studies for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared transradial and transfemoral approaches in adults (18 years of age or older) undergoing diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) for CAD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. At least two authors independently screened trials, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for missing information. We used risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All analyses were checked by another author.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 31 studies (44 reports) including 27,071 participants and two ongoing studies. The risk of bias in the studies was low or unclear for several domains. Compared to the transfemoral approach, the transradial approach reduced short-term net adverse clinical events (NACE) (i.e. assessed during hospitalisation and up to 30 days of follow-up) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.94; 17,133 participants; 4 studies; moderate quality evidence), cardiac death (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88; 11,170 participants; 11 studies; moderate quality evidence). However, short-term myocardial infarction was similar between both groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 19,430 participants; 11 studies; high quality evidence). The transradial approach had a lower procedural success rate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.98; 25,920 participants; 28 studies; moderate quality evidence), but was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; 18,955 participants; 10 studies; high quality evidence), bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.74; 23,043 participants; 20 studies; low quality evidence), and access site complications (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.59; 16,112 participants; 24 studies; low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Transradial approach for diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) in CAD may reduce short-term NACE, cardiac death, all-cause mortality, bleeding, and access site complications. There is insufficient evidence regarding the long-term clinical outcomes (i.e. beyond 30 days of follow-up).

Increased Radial Access Is Not Associated With Worse Femoral Outcomes for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

The radial artery is increasingly adopted as the primary access site for cardiac catheterization because of patient preference, lower bleeding rates, cost effectiveness, and reduced risk of mortality in high-risk patient groups. Concerns have been expressed that operators/centers have become increasingly unfamiliar with transfemoral access. The aim of this study was to assess whether a change in access site practice toward transradial access nationally has led to worse outcomes in percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed through the transfemoral access approach.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS) database, a retrospective analysis of 235 250 transfemoral access percutaneous coronary intervention procedures was undertaken in all 92 centers in England and Wales between 2007 and 2013. Recent femoral proportion and recent femoral volume were determined, and in-hospital vascular complications and 30-day mortality were evaluated. After case-mix adjustment, no independent association was observed between 30-day mortality for cases undertaken through the transfemoral access and center femoral proportion, the risk-adjusted odds ratio for recent femoral proportion was nonsignificant (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.02; P=0.472 per 0.1 increase in proportion), and similarly recent femoral volume (per 100 procedures) was not found to be significant (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.01; P=0.869). The in-hospital vascular complication rate was 1.0%, and this outcome was not significantly associated with recent femoral proportion after risk-adjustment (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.00; P=0.060 per 0.1 increase in proportion).

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome gains achieved by the national adoption of radial access are not associated with a loss of femoral proficiency, and centers should be encouraged to continue to adopt radial access as the default access site for percutaneous coronary intervention wherever possible in line with current best evidence.

Safety of Radial Access for Primary Percutaneous Intervention in Patients With ST-Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results From a Low-Volume Center

Radial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) is recommended in high-volume experienced centers. This study investigated whether radial access for pPCI is safe even in a low-volume center. We performed radial access for pPCI in 171 patients. Major adverse cardiac events (total death, myocardial infarction, stroke) rate was 1.2%. The overall incidence of bleeding complications was 2.4%; there was no vascular complication at the access site. In patients with STEMI undergoing pPCI, the results of radial access in a low-volume center were acceptable. These findings support the safety of radial access in patients with STEMI.

Execution time determines the outcome of the multicenter randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Multicenter randomized controlled trials are the core of evidence-based medicine. Our study aimed to investigate the key factor which determined the outcome of the multicenter randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We searched publications in PubMed for multicenter randomized controlled trials reporting primary data on treating and preventing cardiovascular diseases circulation area. The data were extracted from the including trials and used for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1075 trials for treating and preventing cardiovascular diseases were included, of which 979 were involved in the heart diseases and 96 involved in stroke. The execution time significantly contributed to the outcome of trials with shorter time related to significant outcome. However, the numbers of participated centers and their locations and participants had no effect on the outcome of trials. Moreover, the number of centers showed no significant relationship with execution time.

CONCLUSIONS

Execution time but not centers or participants contributed to the outcome of multicenter randomized controlled trials.

Is There a Relationship of Operator and Center Volume With Access Site-Related Outcomes? An Analysis From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society

BACKGROUND

Transradial access is associated with reduced access site-related bleeding complications and mortality post percutaneous coronary intervention. The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between access site practice and clinical outcomes and how this may be influenced by operator and center experience/expertise.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The influence of operator and center experience/expertise was studied on 30-day mortality, in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of in-hospital mortality and in-hospital myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization) and in-hospital major bleeding based on access site adopted (radial versus femoral). Operator/center experience/expertise were defined by both total volume and transradial access proportion. A total of 164 395 procedures between 2012 and 2013 in the National Health Service in England and Wales were analyzed. After case-mix adjustment, transradial access was associated with an average odds reduction of 39% for 30-day mortality compared with transfemoral access (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.68; P<0.001). The magnitude of this risk reduction was modified by increases in total procedural volume and radial proportion at the operator level (odds ratio reduction of 11% per 100 extra procedures, 95% confidence interval, 3%-19%; odds ratio reduction of 6% per 10%-point increase in radial proportion, 95% confidence interval, 1%-11%) with no significant impact of operator radial volume, center total volume, center radial volume, and center radial proportion.

CONCLUSIONS

The lower mortality associated with transradial access adoption relates to both the total procedural volume and the proportion of procedures undertaken radially by operator, with operators undertaking the greatest proportion of their procedures radially having the largest relative reduction in mortality risk.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Relationship Between Procedural Volume and Outcomes

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an integral treatment modality for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) as well as chronic stable coronary artery disease (CAD) not responsive to optimal medical therapy. This coupled with studies on the feasibility and safety of performing PCI in centers without on-site surgical backup led to widespread growth of PCI centers. However, this has been accompanied by a recent steep decline in the volume of PCIs at both the operator and hospital level, which raises concerns regarding minimal procedural volumes required to maintain necessary skills and favorable clinical outcomes. The 2011 ACC/AHA/SCAI competency statement required PCI be performed by operators with a minimal procedural volume of >75 PCIs annually at high-volume centers with >400 PCIs per year, a number which was relaxed in the 2013 ACC/AHA/SCAI update to >50 PCIs/operator/year in hospitals with >200 PCIs annually to coincide with reduction in national PCI volume. Recent data suggests that many hospitals do not meet these thresholds. We review data on the importance of volume as a vital quality metric at both an operator and hospital level in determining procedural outcomes following PCI.

Spanish Cardiac Catheterization and Coronary Intervention Registry. 25th Official Report of the Spanish Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiac Catheterization and Interventional Cardiology (1990-2015)

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The Working Group on Cardiac Catheterization and Interventional Cardiology presents its annual report on the data from the registry of the activity in 2015.

METHODS

All Spanish hospitals with catheterization laboratories were invited to voluntarily contribute their activity data. The information was collected online and analyzed mostly by an independent company.

RESULTS

In 2015, 106 centers participated in the national register; 73 of these centers are public. A total of 145 836 diagnostic studies were conducted, among which 128 669 were coronary angiograms. These figures are higher than in previous years. The Spanish average of total diagnoses per million population was 3127. The number of coronary interventional procedures was very similar (67 671), although there was a slight increase in the complexity of coronary interventions: 7% in multivessel treatment and 8% in unprotected left main trunk treatment. A total of 98 043 stents were implanted, of which 74 684 were drug-eluting stents. A total of 18 418 interventional procedures were performed in the acute myocardial infarction setting, of which 81.9% were primary angioplasties. The radial approach was used in 73.3% of the diagnostic procedures and in 76.1% of interventional ones. The number of transcatheter aortic valve implantations continued to increase (1586), as well as the number of left atrial appendage closures (331).

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in acute myocardial infarction was reported in 2015. The use of the radial approach and drug-eluting stents also increased in therapeutic procedures. The progressive increase in structural procedures seen in previous years continued.

Controversies in the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Transradial Versus Transfemoral Approach

This article discusses the controversies surrounding the use of transradial versus transfemoral approaches in the management of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, beginning with a review of the benefits of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in this population. The unanswered questions about the mechanism underlying the mortality benefit of transradial PCI are discussed, concluding with recommendations for safe and effective strategies for adoption of the transradial approach to optimize outcomes in these high-risk patients.

Daily cardiac catheterization procedural volume and complications at an academic medical center

BACKGROUND

Over 1,000,000 cardiac catheterizations (CC) are performed annually in the United States. There is a small risk of complication that has persisted despite advances in technology. It is unknown whether daily CC procedural volume can influence this risk. In an effort to improve outcomes at our academic medical center, we investigated the relationship between daily CC volume and complication rates.

METHODS

We obtained data from both the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Cath-PCI and Lumedx© databases reviewing the records of patients undergoing scheduled, non-emergent CC at our facility between January 2005 to June 2013. Daily CC volume was analyzed as were complications including death, post-procedure MI, cardiogenic shock, heart failure, stroke, tamponade, bleeding, hematoma and acute kidney injury (AKI).

RESULTS

12,773 patients were identified who underwent 16,612 CCs on 2,118 days. The average age was 63 years (SD 12.4; range, 18-95). 61% were men. A total of 326 complications occurred in 243 patients on 233 separate days (2.0% CC complication rate). The average volume per day was 7.8 CCs. We found a low correlation between daily complications and CC volume (Spearman's rho =0.11; P<0.01) though complication rates were lowest on days with 6-11 procedures; higher rates were found on slower and busier days.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a U-shaped association between CC volume and rates of CC complications. The lowest complication rates were found on days with 6-11 procedures a day. The highest complication rate was seen with >11 procedures a day.

Radial access in patients with acute coronary syndrome without persistent ST-segment elevation: Systematic review, collaborative meta-analysis, and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Consistent evidence of benefit exists for radial access (RA) in ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). Patients with non ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) have a more varied ischemic and bleeding profile. No randomized trial of vascular access ever focused on NSTE-ACS and landmark studies did not provide conclusive results in this heterogeneous subset of patients.

METHODS

We assessed in a meta-analysis whether RA is associated with improved outcomes in NSTE-ACS patients. Included studies had to meet the following criteria: 1) enrolling patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing invasive management; 2) reporting outcomes with respect to RA as compared with femoral access (FA); 3) reporting short-term (procedural, in-hospital and up to 30-day) or long-term clinical outcomes. Studies were pooled with fixed and random effects models and heterogeneity was investigated by weighted meta-regression.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included encompassing 131.339 patients, 46.451 receiving RA and 84.888 receiving FA. Thirty-day mortality and MACE were lower with RA (p<0.001 with fixed effects, p=NS with random effects model), but these results depended on one large observational database. Major bleeding was consistently reduced by RA (p<0.001), albeit an inverse relationship with the proportion of patients in each study receiving FA and experiencing major bleeding was evident. The association of RA with reduced long-term mortality was of borderline significance (p=0.054 with random-effects, p=0.001 with fixed-effect model) and also depended on major bleeding in FA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

RA is associated with better outcomes as compared with FA in NSTE-ACS, although this observation is influenced by nonrandomized comparisons. Large heterogeneity exists among studies.

REGISTRATION

This study is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42015029459).

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Interventions Across the Entire Spectrum of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative appraisal of the effects on clinical outcomes of radial access for coronary interventions in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials investigating radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary interventions have provided conflicting evidence. No comprehensive quantitative appraisal of the risks and benefits of each approach is available across the whole spectrum of patients with stable or unstable CAD.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized trials comparing radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a fixed-effects or a random-effects model, as appropriate. Pre-specified subgroup analyses according to clinical presentation, in terms of stable CAD, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies enrolling 22,843 participants were included. Compared with femoral access, radial access was associated with a significantly lower risk for all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 0.87; p = 0.001, number needed to treat to benefit [NNTB] = 160), major adverse cardiovascular events (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.94; p = 0.002; NNTB = 99), major bleeding (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.65; p < 0.001; NNTB = 103), and major vascular complications (OR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.35; p < 0.001; NNTB = 117). The rates of myocardial infarction or stroke were similar in the 2 groups. Effects of radial access were consistent across the whole spectrum of patients with CAD for all appraised endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with femoral access, radial access reduces mortality and MACE and improves safety, with reductions in major bleeding and vascular complications across the whole spectrum of patients with CAD.

Comparison of Frequency of Bleeding and Major Adverse Cardiac Events After Transradial Versus Transfemoral Intervention in the Recent Antiplatelet Era

The transradial approach is increasingly used for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and we therefore aimed to compare the clinical outcomes after transradial intervention (TRI) and transfemoral intervention (TFI) in all patients undergoing PCI. Among 6,973 patients enrolled in a nationwide, prospective, multicenter registry (February 2013 to September 2013), 1,860 underwent TRI (n = 1,445, 77.7%) and TFI (n = 415, 22.3%). Bleeding and major adverse cardiac events (MACE; death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, or stent thrombosis) were compared. Bleeding occurred in 42 patients (2.3%) and was significantly less likely in the TRI versus TFI group (overall cohort: 1.5% vs 4.8%, p = 0.001; propensity score-matched: n = 728, 2.7% vs 5.2%, p = 0.048). Multivariate regression revealed that TRI was negatively associated with bleeding (odds ratio 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.83, p = 0.013). MACE occurred in 152 patients (8.2%). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed higher MACE-free survival rates in the TRI versus TFI group (overall cohort: 93.3% vs 86.7%, log-rank p = 0.026; propensity score-matched: 91.8% vs 86.5%, log-rank p = 0.04). Cox proportional analysis demonstrated that TRI independently predicted improved MACE (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91, p = 0.024). In conclusion, TRI is associated with reduced bleeding rates and better clinical outcomes than TFI in all patients undergoing PCI.

Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization for Chronic Total Occlusions: A Novel Predictive Score of Technical Failure Using Advanced Technologies

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to describe the 10-year experience of a single operator dedicated to chronic total occlusion (CTO) and to establish a model for predicting technical failure.

BACKGROUND

During the last decade, the interest in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) of chronic total occlusions (CTOs) has increased, allowing the improvement of success rate.

METHODS

One thousand nineteen patients with CTO underwent 1,073 CTO procedures performed by a single CTO-dedicated operator. The study population was subdivided into 2 groups by time period: period 1 (January 2005 to December 2009, n = 378) and period 2 (January 2010 to December 2014, n = 641). Observations were randomly assigned to a derivation set and a validation set (in a 2:1 ratio). A prediction score was established by assigning points for each independent predictor of technical failure in the derivation set according to the beta coefficient and summing all points accrued.

RESULTS

Lesions attempted in period 2 were more complex in comparison with those in period 1. Compared with period 1, both technical and clinical success rates significantly improved (from 87.8% to 94.4% [p = 0.001] and from 77.6% to 89.9% [p < 0.001], respectively). A prediction score for technical failure including age ≥75 years (1 point), ostial location (1 point), and collateral filling Rentrop grade <2 (2 points) was established, stratifying procedures into 4 difficulty groups: easy (0), intermediate (1), difficult (2), and very difficult (3 or 4), with decreasing technical success rates. In derivation and validation sets, areas under the curve were comparable (0.728 and 0.772, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

With growing expertise, the success rate has increased despite increasing complexity of attempted lesions. The established model predicted the probability of technical failure and thus might be applied to grading the difficulty of CTO procedures.

Reperfusion Times for Radial Versus Femoral Access in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Observations From the Cardiac Care Network Provincial Primary PCI Registry

BACKGROUND

Radial access is associated with less bleeding and vascular complications. However, it may delay reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A provincial database prospectively collected clinical and procedural characteristics for all urgent percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed between June 2010 and September 2011 in Ontario for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, including time of arrival in the catheterization laboratory and time of first balloon inflation. After excluding patients with cardiogenic shock, with previous bypass surgery, or who received fibrinolysis, 2947 patients were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching was used to minimize difference in clinical characteristics between radial and femoral access procedures. Predictors of radial access included younger age and male sex. After propensity score matching, the median time from arrival in the cardiac catheterization laboratory to first balloon was 27 minutes (25th%-75th%, 21-34) for the femoral group and 30 minutes (25th%-75th %, 24-39) for the radial group (P<0.001). When hospitals were stratified based on the proportion of primary percutaneous coronary intervention cases that were performed using radial access, there was no difference in treatment times between radial and femoral access in the tercile of hospitals that used radial access most frequently. There were no significant differences in the rates of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This contemporary multicenter registry demonstrates that the time to first balloon inflation is slightly longer with radial access than with femoral access, although the 3 minute difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. There is no difference in treatment times at hospitals that frequently use radial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Short-term mortality and reinfarction rates are similar with radial and femoral access.

Radial Versus Femoral Access in Invasively Managed Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive management showed conflicting conclusions regarding the effect of access site on outcomes.

PURPOSE

To summarize evidence from recent, high-quality trials that compared clinical outcomes occurring with radial versus femoral access in invasively managed adults with ACS.

DATA SOURCES

English-language publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases between January 1990 and August 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials of radial versus femoral access in invasively managed patients with ACS.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two investigators independently extracted the study data and rated the risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 17 identified randomized trials, 4 were high-quality multicenter trials that involved a total of 17 133 patients. Pooled data from the 4 trials showed that radial access reduced death (relative risk [RR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.90]; P = 0.003), major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.86 [CI, 0.75 to 0.98]; P = 0.025), and major bleeding (RR, 0.57 [CI, 0.37 to 0.88]; P = 0.011). Radial procedures lasted slightly longer (standardized mean difference, 0.11 minutes) and had higher risk for access-site crossover (6.3% vs. 1.7%) than did femoral procedures.

LIMITATION

Heterogeneity in outcomes definitions and potential treatment modifiers across studies, including operator experience in radial procedures and concurrent anticoagulant regimens.

CONCLUSION

Compared with femoral access, radial access reduces mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and major bleeding in patients with ACS undergoing invasive management.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015022031).

The Benefits Conferred by Radial Access for Cardiac Catheterization Are Offset by a Paradoxical Increase in the Rate of Vascular Access Site Complications With Femoral Access: The Campeau Radial Paradox

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess whether the benefits conferred by radial access (RA) at an individual level are offset by a proportionally greater incidence of vascular access site complications (VASC) at a population level when femoral access (FA) is performed.

BACKGROUND

The recent widespread adoption of RA for cardiac catheterization has been associated with increased rates of VASCs when FA is attempted.

METHODS

Logistic regression was used to calculate the adjusted VASC rate in a contemporary cohort of consecutive patients (2006 to 2008) where both RA and FA were used, and compared it with the adjusted VASC rate observed in a historical control cohort (1996 to 1998) where only FA was used. We calculated the adjusted attributable risk to estimate the proportion of VASC attributable to the introduction of RA in FA patients of the contemporary cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 17,059 patients were included. At a population level, the VASC rate was higher in the overall contemporary cohort compared with the historical cohort (adjusted rates: 2.91% vs. 1.98%; odds ratio [OR]: 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 1.89; p = 0.001). In the contemporary cohort, RA patients experienced fewer VASC than FA patients (adjusted rates: 1.44% vs. 4.19%; OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.48; p < 0.001). We observed a higher VASC rate in FA patients in the contemporary cohort compared with the historical cohort (adjusted rates: 4.19% vs. 1.98%; OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.67 to 2.81; p < 0.001). This finding was consistent for both diagnostic and therapeutic catheterizations separately. The proportion of VASCs attributable to RA in the contemporary FA patients was estimated at 52.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary population where both RA and FA were used, the safety benefit associated with RA is offset by a paradoxical increase in VASCs among FA patients. The existence of this radial paradox should be taken into consideration, especially among trainees and default radial operators.

Radial versus femoral access for elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary angiography and intervention: insights from the RIVAL trial

BACKGROUND

Radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with lower rates of access site complications and bleeding. However, elderly patients have more complex vascular anatomy and radial access may be more challenging in this population. There remains uncertainty regarding the role of radial access in elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The RIVAL trial randomized patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing cardiac catheterization to radial versus femoral access. In this analysis, the rates of access site complications and access site cross-over were compared across different age groups. Among the 7,021 patients, 1035 (15%) were ≥75 years of age. Across all age categories, radial access was consistently associated with higher rates of access site cross over and lower rates of major access site complications, with no significant interaction between age and access site. Radial access was associated with lower rates of major vascular access site complications in patients ≥75 years of age (3.6% vs 6.6%; P = .03) and in patients <75 years of age (1.0% vs 3.2%; P < .001; P value for interaction = .2). The rates of access site crossover were higher with radial access among patients ≥75 (12.5% vs 2.6%; P < .001) and <75 (6.7% vs 1.9%; P < .001; P value for interaction = .9). There were no significant differences in the primary composite outcome (death, myocardial infarction, stroke or non coronary artery bypass graft major bleeding) or its individual components in either age group. In patients ≥75 years of age undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, there was no significant difference in procedure time (120 vs 115 minutes; P = .3).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with the overall RIVAL trial population, elderly patients undergoing cardiac catheterization have lower rates of major bleeding or access site complications and higher rates of access site crossover with radial access compared to femoral access.

Sheathless guide catheter in transradial percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of sheathless guide catheters in transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

BACKGROUND

Transradial PCI for STEMI offers significant clinical benefits, including a reduced incidence of vascular complications. As the size of the radial artery is small, the radial artery is frequently damaged in this procedure using large-bore catheters. A sheathless guide catheter offers a solution to this problem as it does not require an introducer sheath. However, the efficacy and safety of sheathless guide catheters remain to be fully determined in emergent transradial PCI for STEMI.

METHODS

Data on consecutive STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI at the Sendai Kousei Hospital between September 2010 and May 2013 were analyzed. The primary endpoint was the rate of acute procedural success without access site crossover. Secondary endpoints included door-to-balloon time, fluoroscopy time, volume of contrast, and radial artery stenosis or occlusion rate.

RESULTS

We conducted transradial PCI for 478 patients with STEMI using a sheathless guide catheter. Acute procedural success was achieved in 466 patients (97.5%). The median door-to-balloon time was 45 min (range, 15-317 min). The median fluoroscopy time was 16.4 min (range, 10-90 min). The median volume of contrast was 134 mL (range, 31-431 mL). Radial stenosis or occlusion developed in 14 (3.8%) of the 370 evaluable patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that use of a sheathless guide catheter taking a transradial approach was effective and safe in primary PCI for STEMI. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Standardized radial approach reduces access site complications: a prospective observational registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of complications by Doppler sonography after radial access for cardiac catheterization in a prospective observational registry.

BACKGROUND

The radial approach for cardiac catheterization is being used with increasing frequency. In randomized trials, the risk of bleeding was lower with radial access compared with femoral access. However, there are still concerns in terms of the radial access because of reported high rates of radial artery occlusion (RAO) up to 30%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective observational registry, a total of 369 procedures were performed using a standardized radial approach in terms of sheath size, anticoagulation, and postinterventional hemostasis. The rates of RAO, hematoma, and vascular complications were assessed the day after catheterization.

RESULTS

A diagnostic procedure was performed in 25.7% and a coronary intervention in 74.3% of patients. Sheath size was 5 Fr in 12.2% (N=45) or 6 Fr in 87.8% (N=324). Doppler sonography showed RAO in 3.8% (N=14/369), with no difference between the 5- and the 6-Fr sheath (2.2 vs. 4.0%, P=0.56). A hematoma of 5 cm or more was documented after two (0.5%) procedures. There was no need for any blood transfusion or surgery. A small hematoma (every hematoma <5 cm) was observed in 16.0% (N=59). There was no statistical difference in the frequency of RAO, hematoma, or vascular complications between procedures performed with 5-Fr or less or 6-Fr sheaths and the use of dual antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation.

CONCLUSION

Radial access for coronary catheterization is effective and safe. With a standardized approach, the rates of bleeding events and RAOs are low.

Predictors of Access Site Crossover in Patients Who Underwent Transradial Coronary Angiography

Despite increasing use of the transradial approach (TRA) for coronary angiography, TRA failure and subsequent access site crossover remain a barrier to TRA adoption. The aim of this study was to elucidate patient and procedural characteristics associated with TRA to transfemoral approach (TFA) crossover and examine TRA to TFA crossover by operator experience over time. This retrospective analysis identified 1,600 patients who underwent coronary angiography with possible percutaneous coronary intervention through TRA by operators with varied TRA experience in an urban tertiary care center from October 2010 to August 2013. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify independent predictors of access site crossover, from TRA to TFA, and strength of association is presented as odds ratio (OR, 95% confidence interval [CI]). Access site crossover was noted in 166 patients (10.4%). Multivariable predictors of access site crossover included age >75 years (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.91, p = 0.004) and operator experience (OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.96 to 4.52, p <0.0001). Less experienced operators (≤5 years TRA experience) had a decrease in access site crossover over time (quartile 1: 8.9%, quartile 2: 18.8%, quartile 3: 16.4%, and quartile 4: 8.6%, p <0.001), which paralleled an increase in the proportion of procedures using initial TRA over time (quartile 1: 38.0%, quartile 2: 53.7%, quartile 3: 54.8%, and quartile 4: 70.3%, p <0.001). Experienced operators (>5 years TRA experience) had no significant change in proportion of access site crossover over time (quartile 1: 2.8%, quartile 2: 6.4%, quartile 3: 5.6%, quartile 4: 5.8%, p = 0.54). In conclusion, rate of access site crossover in the contemporary era is relatively low and can be mitigated with operator experience.

Effect of access site, gender, and indication on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS)

BACKGROUND

Gender is a strong predictor of periprocedural major bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The access site represents an important site of such bleeding complications, which has driven adoption of the transradial access (TRA) use during PCI, although female gender is an independent predictor of transradial PCI failure. This study sought to define gender differences in access site practice and study associations between access site choice and clinical outcomes for PCI over a 6-year period, through the analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society observational database.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of in-hospital mortality and in-hospital myocardial reinfarction and target vessel revascularization), in-hospital bleeding complications, and 30-day mortality were studied based on gender and access site choice (transfemoral access, TRA) in 412,122 patients who underwent PCI between 2007 and 2012 in the United Kingdom. Use of TRA increased in both genders over time, although this lagged behind in women (21% in 2007 to 58% in 2012) compared with men (24% in 2007 to 64% in 2012). In both men and women, TRA was independently associated with a lower in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular event (odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.76-0.90; OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.84), in-hospital major bleeding (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.44-0.66; OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.20-0.33), and 30-day mortality (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.89; OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.94), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Where possible, TRA should be considered as the preferred access site choice for PCI, particularly in women in whom the greatest reductions bleeding end points were observed across all indications.

Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether radial compared with femoral access improves outcomes in unselected patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management.

METHODS

We did a randomised, multicentre, superiority trial comparing transradial against transfemoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were about to undergo coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to radial or femoral access with a web-based system. The randomisation sequence was computer generated, blocked, and stratified by use of ticagrelor or prasugrel, type of acute coronary syndrome (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, troponin positive or negative, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome), and anticipated use of immediate percutaneous coronary intervention. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events, defined as major adverse cardiovascular events or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The analysis was by intention to treat. The two-sided α was prespecified at 0·025. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627.

FINDINGS

We randomly assigned 8404 patients with acute coronary syndrome, with or without ST-segment elevation, to radial (4197) or femoral (4207) access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. 369 (8·8%) patients with radial access had major adverse cardiovascular events, compared with 429 (10·3%) patients with femoral access (rate ratio [RR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·74-0·99; p=0·0307), non-significant at α of 0·025. 410 (9·8%) patients with radial access had net adverse clinical events compared with 486 (11·7%) patients with femoral access (0·83, 95% CI 0·73-0·96; p=0·0092). The difference was driven by BARC major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (1·6% vs 2·3%, RR 0·67, 95% CI 0·49-0·92; p=0·013) and all-cause mortality (1·6% vs 2·2%, RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·53-0·99; p=0·045).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, radial as compared with femoral access reduces net adverse clinical events, through a reduction in major bleeding and all-cause mortality.

FUNDING

The Medicines Company and Terumo.

Use and outcome of radial versus femoral approach for primary PCI in patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction without cardiogenic shock: results from the ALKK PCI registry

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the use and outcome of radial versus femoral access in patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

The radial approach for PCI in patients with STEMI has been suggested to have a lower rate of complications and bleeding and to improve prognosis compared with the femoral approach. However, there still is a large regional and national variation in its use.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2012 a total of 17,865 patients with STEMI without cardiogenic shock undergoing primary PCI were prospectively enrolled in the observational German PCI registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft leitende kardiologische Krankenhausärzte (ALKK). Transfemoral (TF) access was used in 15,270 (85.5%), transradial (TR) access in 2,530 (14.2%), and other access in 65 (0.3%) patients. In this analysis, 10,264 patients from 20 centers that had performed at least 5 TR-PCI for STEMI were included. This study compared TR-PCI (n = 2,454 23.9%) with TF-PCI (n = 7,810, 76.1%).

RESULTS

Procedural success was high in both cohorts. Hospital mortality (1.8 vs. 5.1%, P < 0.001) and vascular access complications (0.3 vs. 1.8%, P < 0.001%) were lower in the TR group. In the multivariate analysis radial access was associated with an improved in-hospital survival rate (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35-0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

The radial approach for PCI can be performed with excellent procedural success in selected STEMI patients and is associated with a lower rate of vascular access complications and hospital mortality.