CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin in lowering LDL cholesterol : A meta-analysis of trials with East Asian populations Drug-coated balloons for small coronary artery disease (BASKET-SMALL 2): an open-label randomised non-inferiority trial 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in a large cohort of all-comers undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Comparison of five contrast media Coronary Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: 10-Year Results From the China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study A Randomized Trial to Assess Regional Left Ventricular Function After Stent Implantation in Chronic Total Occlusion The REVASC Trial Management of No-Reflow Phenomenon in the Catheterization Laboratory Developing and Testing a Personalized, Evidence-Based, Shared Decision-Making Tool for Stent Selection in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using a Pre-Post Study Design

Clinical TrialMay 18, 2021.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. Article Link

Randomized Comparison Between Radial and Femoral Large-Bore Access for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

TA Meijers , A Aminian , M van Wely et al. Keywords: transradial PCI vs. transfemoral PCI; large-bore guiding catheters; access site–related bleeding or vascular complications

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to investigate whether transradial (TR) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is superior to transfemoral (TF) PCI in complex coronary lesions with large-bore guiding catheters with respect to clinically relevant access siterelated bleeding or vascular complications.

 

BACKGROUND - The femoral artery is currently the most applied access site for PCI of complex coronary lesions, especially when large-bore guiding catheters are required. With downsizing of TR equipment, TR PCI may be increasingly applied in these patients and might be a safer alternative compared with the TF approach.

 

METHODS - An international prospective multicenter trial was conducted, randomizing 388 patients with planned PCI for complex coronary lesions, including chronic total occlusion, left main, heavy calcification, or complex bifurcation, to either 7-F TR access (TRA) or 7-F TF access (TFA). The primary endpoint was defined as access siterelated clinically significant bleeding or vascular complications requiring intervention at discharge. The secondary endpoint was procedural success.

 

RESULTS - The primary endpoint event rate was 3.6% for TRA and 19.1% for TFA (p < 0.001). The crossover rate from radial to femoral access was 3.6% and from femoral to radial access was 2.6% (p = 0.558). The procedural success rate was 89.2% for TFA and 86.0% for TRA (p = 0.285). There was no difference between TFA and TRA with regard to procedural duration, contrast volume, or radiation dose.

 

CONCLUSIONS - In patients undergoing PCI of complex coronary lesions with large-bore access, radial compared with femoral access is associated with a significant reduction in clinically relevant access-site bleeding or vascular complications, without affecting procedural success. (Complex Large-Bore Radial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] Trial [Color]; NCT03846752)