medigraphic.com
ISSN 0185-3252 (Print)
Revista de la Asociación Médica del Centro Médico ABC

2019, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

An Med Asoc Med Hosp ABC 2019; 64 (1)

Contemporary registry of the coronary catheterization access

López MJG, Cabrera LCF, Ibarra TAD, Heredia SAC, Soto LME

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 17-21
PDF size: 205.14 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Radial access is considered the preferred approach in most interventional cardiology centers. The advantages include less risk of bleeding, more comfort and a mortality benefit in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Objective: To show the contemporary tendencies in radial or femoral access for coronary angiography with or without angioplasty. Material and methods: A descriptive and retrospective study was performed; the population included all patients over 18 years old who underwent a coronary catheterization from January 2013 to December 2015 in both campuses (Centro Médico ABC Campus Santa Fe and Observatorio). Results: 510 patients were included for the analysis. The radial access was performed in 304 cases (60%), and the transfemoral access in 206 cases (40%). The mean intrahospital length of stay was 3.5 days for the transradial access and 4.7 days for the femoral access (p ≤ 0.001). The most prevalent diagnosis was unstable angina, with a predominant radial access in 63.9%. Admission for catheterism due to ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction occurred in 114 cases (22.3%); it was carried out through radial access in 52.6%, and through transfemoral access in 47.4%. Conclusion: Radial access is an option in acute coronary syndromes, in view of a decrease in long-term mortality and less vascular access site complications, although these variables are determined by a learning curve and large-volume centers; for these reasons, the femoral approach is still justified.


REFERENCES

  1. Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GG, De Benedictis ML, Rigattieri S, Turri M, Anselmi M et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures: Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44 (2): 349-356.

  2. Azzalini L, Tosin K, Chabot-Blanchet M, Avram R, Ly HQ, Gaudet B et al. 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. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 8 (14): 1854-1864.

  3. Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, Slagboom T, Van Der Wieken R. A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: the access study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997; 29 (6): 1269-1275.

  4. Shah RM, Patel D, Abbate A, Cowley MJ, Jovin IS. Comparison of transradial coronary procedures via right radial versus left radial artery approach: a meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 88 (7): 1027-1033.

  5. Le May MR, Singh K, Wells GA. Efficacy of radial versus femoral access in the acute coronary syndrome: is it the operator or the operation that matters? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 8 (11): 1405-1409.

  6. Hamon M, Rasmussen LH, Manoukian SV, Cequier A, Lincoff MA, Rupprecht HJ et al. Choice of arterial access site and outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes managed with an early invasive strategy: the ACUITY trial. EuroIntervention. 2009; 5 (1): 115-120.

  7. Mina GS, Gobrial GF, Modi K, Dominic P. Combined use of bivalirudin and radial access in acute coronary syndromes is not superior to the use of either one separately: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9 (15): 1523-1531.

  8. Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabró P, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, Zaro T et al. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015; 385 (9986): 2465-2476.

  9. Romagnoli E, Biondi-Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A, Politi L, Rigattieri S, Pendenza G et al. Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: The RIFLE-STEACS (radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60 (24): 2481-2489.

  10. Mehta SR, Jolly SS, Cairns J, Niemela K, Rao SV, Cheema AN et al. Effects of radial versus femoral artery access in patients with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60 (24): 2490-2499.

  11. Bernat I, Horak D, Stasek J, Mates M, Pesek J, Ostadal P et al. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by radial or femoral approach in a multicenter randomized clinical trial: The STEMI-RADIAL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63 (10): 964-972.

  12. Joyal D, Bertrand OF, Rinfret S, Shimony A, Eisenberg MJ. Meta-analysis of ten trials on the effectiveness of the radial versus the femoral approach in primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2012; 109 (6): 813-818.

  13. Lee MS, Wolfe M, Stone GW. Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes: Re-evaluation of the current body of evidence. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 6 (11): 1149-1152.

  14. Karrowni W, Vyas A, Giacomino B, Schweizer M, Blevins A, Girotra S et al. Radial versus femoral access for primary percutaneous interventions in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 6 (8): 814-823.

  15. Bavishi C, Panwar SR, Dangas GD, Barman N, Hasan CM, Baber U et al. Meta-analysis of radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary interventions in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 2016; 117 (2): 172-178.

  16. Michael TT, Alomar M, Papayannis A, Mogabgab O, Patel VG, Rangan BV et al. A randomized comparison of the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary artery bypass graft angiography and intervention: The RADIAL-CABG Trial (RADIAL versus femoral access for coronary artery bypass graft angiography and intervention). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 6 (11): 1138-1144.

  17. Rigattieri S, Sciahbasi A, Brilakis ES, Burzotta F, Rathore S, Pugliese FR et al. Meta-analysis of radial versus femoral artery approach for coronary procedures in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting. Am J Cardiol. 2016; 117 (8): 1248-1255.

  18. Park EY, Shroff AR, Van-Thomas C, Vidovich MI. A review of radiation exposures associated with radial cardiac catheterisation. EuroIntervention. 2013; 9 (6): 745-753.

  19. Plourde G, Pancholy SB, Nolan J, Jolly S, Rao SV, Amhed I et al. Radiation exposure in relation to the arterial access site used for diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2015; 386 (10009): 2192-2203.

  20. Sciahbasi A, Frigoli E, Sarandrea A, Rothenbühler M, Calabrò P, Lupi A et al. Radiation exposure and vascular access in acute coronary syndromes: the RAD-Matrix trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 69 (20): 2530-2537.

  21. Andò G, Cortese B, Russo F, Rothenbühler M, Frigoli E, Gargiulo G et al. Acute kidney injury after radial or femoral access for invasive acute coronary syndrome management: AKI-MATRIX. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 69 (21): 2592-2603.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com