Do We Still Need to Assess Post-procedural Radial Artery Compression Time and Radial Artery Occlusion in Patients Who Undergo Transradial Coronary Intervention?

Background and objective Transradial access (TRA) for interventional coronary procedures has now been widely accepted as the preferred vascular site approach. The duration of post-procedure compression has been shown to be a crucial factor and different hemostatic devices used in this regard have been compared. In this study, we aimed to compare the post-procedure compression time, radial artery occlusion (RAO), hematoma, and bleeding between the transradial (TR) band and AIR band for radial artery patency among patients presenting at a tertiary care hospital. Methodology This observational study was conducted at the Department of Cardiology of Mohammed Bin Khalifa Bin Sulman Al Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre, Awali, Bahrain from 06/03/2022 to 05/06/2022. The research involved patients of either gender who had a positive Barbeau test (type A to C) and were receiving percutaneous coronary intervention via a transradial route. Patients who underwent transradial coronary intervention were classified into two separate groups, depending on whether an AIR band (group A) or a TR band (group B) compression was used. Following coronary catheterization, radial hemostatic compression devices were used. The results were documented both during and after the hemostatic compression. The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results Of the total 100 patients included in the study, the majority were males (86%) and aged more than 50 years (83%). AIR band was successfully removed in 32 patients (64%) in less than four hours, compared to the TR band, which was removed in less than four hours in two patients (4%) only (p=0.001). The incidences of bleeding (p=0.790) and RAO (p=0.495) were similar between the AIR band group and the TR band group. Hematoma was not seen in any of the patients in either group. Conclusion AIR band was observed to be more efficacious in decreasing the radial artery compression time. However, the difference in RAO was insignificant in the short term, and follow-up studies are required to see if the AIR band is associated with any long-term benefits.

Adjustable continence therapy (ACT®) balloons to treat neurogenic and non-neurogenic female urinary incontinence

AIMS

To compare efficacy and safety between neurogenic and non-neurogenic women after adjustable continence therapy (ACT®) balloons implantation to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency.

METHODS

In the present retrospective multicentric study, all neurogenic and non-neurogenic women implanted with ACT® balloons between 2000 and 2018 were considered for inclusion. Efficacy was compared 1 year after implantation, and women were allocated in three different groups as follows. Success: maximum 1 pad per day and patient's impression of improvement assessed using a numeral rating scale (NRS) ≥8/10. Improvement: decrease of daily pad use and/or NRS ≥5/10. Failure: increase or stability of daily pad use or NRS <5/10. Overall surgical complications and explantations were compared 1 year after implantation.

RESULTS

Among the 277 included women, 51 presented with a neurologic underlying disease. Mean age at implantation was 68.5 years. There was no significant difference in efficacy between neurogenic and non-neurogenic women with a success rate of 39.2% and 36.3%, respectively (p = 0.69). Similarly, improvement rate was reported to be 31.4% and 33.6%, in neurogenic and non-neurogenic women, respectively (p = 0.92). The overall surgical complications rate (24% vs. 34.5%, p = 0.15) and the explantation rate (19.6% vs. 28.8%, p = 0.18) were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

ACT balloons may be proposed to treat mixed or SUI in females with ISD. Efficacy and safety profiles appear to be similar in both neurogenic and non-neurogenic patients.

Patients' and radiographers' experiences of dose reducing abdominal compression in radiographic examinations-A qualitative study

Aim

To describe patients' and radiographers' experiences of abdominal compression using conventional and patient-controlled compression methods.

Design

Qualitative descriptive design.

Methods

Forty-five patients who had used both a conventional and a patient-controlled compression device answered questionnaires. Five radiographers were interviewed. The data-collection took place between September 2015 and February 2017. Data were analysed by qualitative content analysis.

Results

Patient-controlled compression was preferred by slightly more patients because of fear of pain due to excessively hard pressure, maintaining control over the pressure and shorter duration. It was more comfortable, and patients felt they could participate in the examinations. Conventional compression was preferred by some because of more stable pressure and uncertainty of own capacity to provide the optimal compression. Discomfort was more often mentioned concerning the conventional compression method. The radiographers experienced the patient-controlled method as less time-consuming and more comfortable, but uncertainty about correct compression technique and its effect on radiation dose and image quality was reported.

Manual Versus Mechanical Compression of the Radial Artery After Transradial Coronary Angiography: The MEMORY Multicenter Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare manual versus mechanical compression of the radial artery after coronary angiography via transradial access regarding radial artery occlusion (RAO), access-site bleeding complications, and duration of hemostasis.

BACKGROUND

Hemostasis of the radial artery after sheath removal can be achieved either by manual compression at the puncture site or by using a mechanical hemostasis device. Because mechanical compression exerts a more stable, continuous pressure on the artery, it could be hypothesized that it is more effective compared with manual compression regarding hemostasis time, bleeding, and RAO risks.

METHODS

A total of 589 patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography by transradial access with a 5-F sheath were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either manual or mechanical patent hemostasis of the radial artery. Radial artery patency was evaluated by color duplex ultrasonography 24 h after the procedure. The primary endpoint was early RAO at 24 h. Secondary endpoints included access-site bleeding complications and duration of hemostasis.

RESULTS

Thirty-six (12%) early RAOs occurred in the manual group, and 24 (8%) occurred in the mechanical group (p = 0.176). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding access-site bleeding complications (hematoma, 52 [17%] vs. 50 [18%]; p = 0.749; bleedings, 8 [3%] vs. 9 [3%]; p = 1.000). Duration of hemostasis was significantly shorter in the manual group (22 ± 34 min vs. 119 ± 72 min with mechanical compression; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Manual and mechanical compression resulted in similar rates of early RAO, although the total duration of hemostasis was significantly shorter in the manual group.