Comparison of radial access versus femoral access with the use of a vascular closure device for the prevention of vascular complications and mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention

Hemostasis after transradial coronary intervention by rotary compression device with sterile gauze is associated with more adverse events: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the relationship between using a rotary compression device (RCD) with or without sterile gauze and adverse events in transradial access (TRA) for coronary intervention.

METHODS

In this study involving 933 patients at Yueyang Hospital, we recorded TRA-related adverse events, such as bleeding, forearm hematoma, swollen palms, radial artery occlusion (RAO) and others. Logistic regression was applied to assess the association.

RESULTS

Of the 933 patients (66.7% males, average age 67.8 years), 511 used RCD with sterile gauze, whereas 422 used RCD without sterile gauze. The most common adverse events were radial artery hemorrhage (7.4%), hand swelling (4.8%) and RAO (4.6%). Logistic regression analysis revealed that the use of RCD with sterile gauze was associated with a higher prevalence of adverse events [odds ratio (OR), 1.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22-2.49), even with the adjustment of potential confounders (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.19-2.45). Moreover, patients who used RCD with sterile gauze exhibited an increased risk of radial artery hemorrhage (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.07-3.12), swelling of the hand (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.02-3.75) and RAO (OR, 3.17; 95% CI, 1.49-6.72).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of RCD with sterile gauze in TRA is associated with a higher incidence of adverse events.

Retrospective analysis of coronary interventions in a single centre and comparison of specific differences between radial and femoral access

Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse the consequence of radial or femoral access during coronary interventions to radiation dose, fluorography time and a number of pseudoaneurysms following each type of intervention. Background: According to the results of many recent studies (RIVAL, RIFLE-STEACS, STEMI RADIAL), current guidelines favour radial over femoral access during coronary intervention for safety, especially in cases of acute coronary syndromes. However, several papers have referred to problems in the design of these studies and the management of antithrombotic therapy. The influence of access site on radiation dose and fluorography time is also still unclear. Methods: We retrospectively analysed 4522 patients who underwent coronary angiography in 2012 and 2016 in a single centre in the Czech Republic. We compared the access site with the average radiation dose and mean effective dose that each patient received in Gy/cm² or mSv, respectively. We also compared average fluorography time in minutes and the incidence of pseudoaneurysms. Results: The radiation dose was a body mass index (BMI)-dependent parameter since each five points of body mass index increased radiation dose approximately by 23%. Use of femoral access resulted in lower fluorography time in all subgroups (p < .001) and decreased radiation dose in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs) by 26% (p = .044). On the other hand, there has been 16 times lower frequency (p < .001) of post-catheterisation pseudoaneurysms after radial access than after femoral access. Conclusions: Both the radiation dose and fluorography time were lower after femoral access compared to radial access in patients with CABGs. On the other hand, radial access led to significantly fewer periprocedural pseudoaneurysms. Radial access therefore should be considered as the preferred access site during coronary intervention in patients with a high risk of pseudoaneurysm development, and femoral access should be considered for patients with a high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.

Differences of bleedings after percutaneous coronary intervention using femoral closure and radial compression devices

Bleedings represent most relevant complications being correlated with significant rates of adverse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). To reduce bleeding and improve prognosis various types of vascular closure devices (VCD) are frequently applied. This study aims to compare directly one specific femoral closure (FC) to one specific radial compression (RC) device in patients after PCI focusing on overall and access-site bleedings as well as major adverse cardiac events (MACE).This single-center, prospective, and observational study included consecutive patients either treated by the FC (StarClose SE) or RC (TR Band) device following PCI. The primary outcome was bleeding; the secondary outcomes were MACE at 30 days of follow-up.Two hundred patients in each group were enrolled following PCI. Access-site bleeding was significantly higher in the FC (43%) compared to the RC (30%) group (P = .001). Most common type of access-site bleeding consisted of hematomas. Of these, small and large hematomas were significantly higher in the FC group (P < .05). No significant differences of MACE were observed in both groups. In multivariable logistic regression models no consistent significant association of any risk factor with bleeding complications was identified.Despite the use of VCD, transfemoral arterial access is still associated with a higher rates of access site bleeding consisting mostly of hematomas compared to trans-radial access, whereas no differences of MACE were observed between FC and RC patients at 30 days follow-up.