Transradial artery access for carotid artery stenting: A pooled analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) through transradial access (TRA) is emerging as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy. However, the current evidence base is limited, mainly comprising single-center studies. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess the safety and effectiveness of TRA for CAS, providing evidence to support clinical decisions. METHODS: We conducted searches on PUBMED, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases, including studies on TRA for CAS. Studies with fewer than 20 patients, non-primary outcomes, and non-full-text articles were excluded. RESULTS: We analyzed 14 studies involving 1,166 patients who underwent CAS via TRA. Procedural success rate was high in 13 studies, with a 95% rate (95% CI; 92%-98%). Crossover to TFA access was observed in 12 studies at 6% (95% CI: 3%-9%). Transradial access failure was reported in four studies, with a rate of 0% (95% CI: 0%-0%). Cannulation failure resulted in a rate of 4% (95% CI: 2%-7%). Asymptomatic radial artery occlusion (ARAO) occurred at a rate of 2% based on eight studies (95% CI: 0%-5%). Forearm hematoma was reported in 10 studies, with an occurrence of 1% (95% CI: 0%-2%). Cerebral vascular attacks (CAV) within 30 days were assessed in 13 studies, indicating a 2% occurrence (95% CI: 1%-2%). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that TRA for CAS yields promising outcomes with high success rates and low complication rates. Further research should focus on randomized controlled trials and long-term outcomes to validate and extend findings.

Prolonged Doppler US-guided pneumatic compression of a radial artery pseudoaneurysm after percutaneous coronary intervention: a simple and effective solution for a rare and challenging problem.

Transradial access is associated with fewer access site-related complications, earlier patient mobilization, and greater postprocedural comfort. Pseudoaneurysms are an extremely rare complication after transradial procedures and the radial artery itself is the most atypical arterial site of occurrence. We report a case in which a non-surgical, non-invasive, simple, and effective solution (prolonged pneumatic compression) was used to manage a radial artery pseudoaneurysm, a very rare and challenging complication of transradial procedures.

O acesso arterial transradial está associado a menos complicações relacionadas ao sítio de punção, com deambulação precoce do paciente e maior conforto pós-procedimento. O pseudoaneurisma é uma complicação extremamente rara após procedimentos transradiais, sendo a artéria radial, por si só, o sítio mais incomum para tal ocorrência. Relata-se um caso de um pseudoaneurisma de artéria radial, uma complicação rara e desafiadora, resolvido com êxito e de maneira simples, não invasiva e não cirúrgica (compressão pneumática prolongada).

Coronary procedures via distal transradial access in older as compared with non-older patients: Insights from the DISTRACTION registry.

BACKGROUND: Older patients are at a higher risk of access site complications and bleeding. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis have highlighted the benefits of distal over proximal transradial access (mainly, lower rates of radial artery occlusion and faster hemostasis). We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of distal transradial access (dTRA) for routine coronary procedures in older patients compared with non-older patients. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a large and real-world sample of 5524 consecutive all-comers patients who underwent coronary procedures via dTRA were included in the DISTRACTION registry. RESULTS: In the older patients (greater than or equal to 65 years) group (n = 2594, 47%), there were higher rates of hypertension (83% vs 71.1%; P less than .0001), diabetes (45.1% vs 34.7%; P less than .0001), previous stroke (2.9% vs 2%; P=.0425), chronic heart failure (9.2% vs 7.1%; P=.0040), severe aortic valvar disease (4.2% vs 2.9%; P=.0070), chronic kidney disease stages 3 and 4 (8.1% vs 3.1%; P less than .0001), previous percutaneous coronary intervention (27.2% vs 24.5%; P=.0253), previous coronary artery bypass grafting (5.1% vs 2.2%; P less than .0001), cardiogenic shock at presentation (1.3% vs 0.4%; P=.0003), rotational atherectomy (0.7% vs 0.2%; P=.0050), and left main percutaneous coronary intervention (2.7% vs 1.5%; P=.0033). No significant differences were observed in the rates of access site crossovers. No major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events directly related to dTRA, no hand/thumb dysfunction or ischemia after any procedure, and no access site-related hematomas (early discharge after transradial stenting of coronary arteries greater than or equal to 2) were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Despite more comorbidities, more complex coronary disease, and more challenging presentation, the adoption of dTRA as the default approach for routine coronary procedures in older patients, by proficient operators, appears to be safe and feasible.

Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty in the Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Era.

As the population continues to grow, and life expectancy has increased, aortic stenosis (AS) has become the most common valvular disease requiring surgical treatment. The evolution of valve replacement therapies has progressed significantly since 1960. In the last 20 years, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been a game changer, and has potential to become the standard of care. Despite uncertain prognosis benefits, balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) can be useful in a broad range of patients with AS, as well as being a bridging therapy to valve replacement, or as a destination therapy, besides its role in TAVI procedures. This review describes the contemporary role of BAV in AS treatment, and focuses on technical improvements that reframe BAV as an effective tool in a variety of clinical scenarios. One of these improvements is transradial BAV, either with the conventional approach of BAV or applying the bilateral technique with two balloons.

Prolonged Doppler US-guided pneumatic compression of a radial artery pseudoaneurysm after percutaneous coronary intervention: a simple and effective solution for a rare and challenging problem / Compressão pneumática prolongada e guiada por ultrassom de um pseudoaneurisma da artéria radial após intervenção coronariana percutânea: solução simples e eficaz para um problema raro e desafiador

Abstract Transradial access is associated with fewer access site-related complications, earlier patient mobilization, and greater postprocedural comfort. Pseudoaneurysms are an extremely rare complication after transradial procedures and the radial artery itself is the most atypical arterial site of occurrence. We report a case in which a non-surgical, non-invasive, simple, and effective solution (prolonged pneumatic compression) was used to manage a radial artery pseudoaneurysm, a very rare and challenging complication of transradial procedures.

Resumo O acesso arterial transradial está associado a menos complicações relacionadas ao sítio de punção, com deambulação precoce do paciente e maior conforto pós-procedimento. O pseudoaneurisma é uma complicação extremamente rara após procedimentos transradiais, sendo a artéria radial, por si só, o sítio mais incomum para tal ocorrência. Relata-se um caso de um pseudoaneurisma de artéria radial, uma complicação rara e desafiadora, resolvido com êxito e de maneira simples, não invasiva e não cirúrgica (compressão pneumática prolongada).

Distal transradial access for coronary procedures: a prospective cohort of 3,683 all-comers patients from the DISTRACTION registry.

Background: Distal transradial access (dTRA) as an improvement of the traditional transradial approach has several potential advantages including operator and patient comfort, faster hemostasis, and lower risk of proximal radial artery occlusion (RAO). We aim to describe our real-world experience with dTRA as default approach for routine coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in a broad and prospective cohort of all-comers patients. Methods: In the DISTRACTION registry, a total of 3,683 consecutive all-comers patients who underwent coronary procedures via dTRA were included. Results: The mean patient age was 63.3±13.5-year-old, 66.1% were male, 39.7% had diabetes, and 50.2% presented with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Overall, 20% of patients had non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), 22.9% had ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and 2.6% presented in cardiogenic shock. There were 2.5% access site crossovers, 16% of those were performed via contralateral dTRA; thus, in only 77 (2.1%) patients dTRA sheath insertion could not be obtained. Right dTRA (rdTRA) was the most frequent access (80.2%), followed by redo ipsilateral dTRA (10.5%), left dTRA (ldTRA) (8.6%) and simultaneous bilateral dTRA (0.7%). PCI was performed in 60.4% of all cases, and left anterior descending was the most treated vessel (29%). No access site-related hematoma type ≥2, according to EASY classification was recorded. No hand/thumb dysfunction after any procedure was documented. One patient developed a pseudoaneurysm, and one had guidewire-induced forearm radial artery perforation. There were neither major complications nor major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events directly related to dTRA. Conclusions: In this large, prospective, all-commers patients registry the adoption of dTRA as standard for routine coronary interventions appears to be safe and feasible.

Experiencia inicial de la revascularización coronaria percutánea mediante el acceso transradial en el Instituto de Cardiología y Cirugía Cardiovascular / Initial experience of percutaneous coronary revascularization through transradial access at the Institute of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery

Introducción: En los últimos años la utilización de la vía radial como forma de acceso para la realización de estudios diagnósticos e intervencionista ha cobrado mayor importancia e interés dentro de los servicios de cardiología intervencionista a nivel mundial. Nuestro país no escapa de este auge por la baja tasa de complicación y la mayor comodidad para el paciente. Objetivo: Caracterizar la intervención coronaria percutánea mediante la vía de acceso radial en pacientes atendidos en el Instituto de Cardiología y Cirugía Cardiovascular. Método: Estudio observacional, descriptivo, transversal. Muestra compuesta por 211 pacientes a los que se les realizó intervencionismo coronario percutáneo mediante la vía de acceso radial. Resultados: Predominó el sexo masculino (61,2 por ciento). La edad media fue 60,1 ±9,8 años. El Síndrome Coronario Crónico (76,3 por ciento ) fue el diagnóstico mayoritario, la hipertensión arterial el factor de riesgo más frecuente (73,9 por ciento ) y entre los antecedentes personales la cardiopatía isquémica (30,3 por ciento ). El intervencionismo de forma electiva se realizó en el 76,3 de los casos, utilizando la vía radial derecha en el 88,2 por ciento . Se demostró enfermedad de 2 y 3 vasos en el 45,1 por ciento de los pacientes. El proceder fue exitoso en el 96,7 por ciento de los pacientes. Las variables que demostraron relación estadísticamente significativa con el fracaso fueron: fracción de eyección del ventrículo izquierdo < 40 por ciento (p<0.0001), filtrado glomerular ≤ 60 ml/min (p=0.002), antecedente de cardiopatía isquémica (p= 0.016) y presencia de enfermedad coronaria de 3 vasos (p= 0.019). Conclusiones: La intervención coronaria percutánea mediante el acceso radial en el ICCCV es segura y eficaz, con una tasa de éxito elevada y escasas complicaciones(AU)

Introduction: In recent years the use of the radial approach as a form of access for diagnostic and interventional studies has become increasingly important and of interest in interventional cardiology services worldwide. Our country has not escaped this boom due to the low complication rate and greater patient comfort. Objective: To characterise percutaneous coronary intervention using the radial access route in patients attended at the Institute of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery. Methods: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. The sample consisted of 211 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention via the radial access route. Results: Male sex predominated (61.2 percent). Mean age was 60.1 ±9.8 years. Chronic coronary syndrome (76.3 percent) was the most common diagnosis, hypertension the most frequent risk factor (73.9) percent and ischaemic heart disease (30.3 percent ). Elective intervention was performed in 76.3 percent of cases, using the right radial approach in 88.2 percent . Two- and three-vessel disease was demonstrated in 45.1 percent of patients. The procedure was successful in 96.7 percent of patients. Variables demonstrating statistically significant relationship with failure were: left ventricular ejection fraction < 40 percent (p(0.0001), glomerular filtration rate ≤ 60 ml/min (p=0.002), history of ischaemic heart disease (p= 0.016) and presence of 3-vessel coronary artery disease (p= 0.019). Conclusions: Percutaneous coronary intervention via radial access in ICCCV is safe and effective, with a high success rate and few complications(AU)

Unprotected Left Main Primary PCI via Distal Transradial Access in the Setting of STEMI-Related Cardiogenic Shock.

Despite all well-known benefits of transradial access, patients presenting with cardiogenic shock are usually submitted to coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention via traditional transfemoral access, mainly due to challenge puncture of radial artery in the setting of hemodynamic instability. We report a challenging case of STEMI-related cardiogenic shock requiring primary PCI of an occluded and unprotected left main, safety, and successfully performed via right distal trans radial access in the anatomical snuffbox.

Chronic Total Occlusion Recanalization Concurrent to Culprit Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention via Distal Transradial Access: Maximizing Revascularization Through Minimalist Approach.

For ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multi-vessel coronary disease, complete revascularization is superior to culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Chronic total occlusion represents the most challenging setting for PCI. Distal transradial access (dTRA) has advantages such as faster hemostasis and risk of proximal radial artery occlusion. We report a case of nonculprit coronary total occlusion recanalization concurrent to culprit primary PCI via dTRA in the setting of STEMI.

Safety and efficacy of radial access in trauma in 65 trauma endovascular cases.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular techniques in trauma surgery are becoming increasingly important in patient management, with procedures such as pelvic and splenic angioembolization becoming the standard of care for certain injuries. Traditionally, such interventions are performed via femoral access, although the morbidity of this approach is not insignificant (3%-10%). Transradial access (TRA) is an attractive alternative, pioneered by cardiologists, with low rates of access site complications in patients undergoing coronary intervention. Recently, this technology has extended to other interventions. The aim of this study was to present the initial experience of a radial program in a busy trauma center, with specific regard to safety and complications. METHODS: The medical records of trauma patients undergoing endovascular procedures via TRA between March 2018 and December 2018 were queried for procedural and postoperative data. Demography and injury characteristics were presented for the overall cohort, followed by a comparison of procedural data and complications between laterality. Continuous variables were compared using a two-tailed t-test and categorical variables were compared using a χ2 test. RESULTS: Over a 9-month period, 65 patients underwent 81 interventions via TRA, most commonly solid organ or pelvic angiography/embolization. Radial artery access was achieved in all patients, with procedural success achieved in all but two patients (n = 63 [96.9%]) who had hypoplastic radial artery anatomy, who underwent ulnar access. The overall technique-related complication rate was 1.5% with no difference observed between laterality (n = 1; P = .523). One patient with an admission Glasgow Coma Score of 3 and coagulopathy developed radial artery thrombosis after pelvic angiography via right TRA. Mortality was seen in seven patients (10.8%) owing to hemorrhagic shock (n = 3 [42.8%]) or multiorgan failure (n = 4 [57.1%]). There were no cases of postprocedural access site bleeding, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, vascular injury, intraoperative arrhythmia or cerebrovascular accident, arteriovenous fistula formation, or infection. CONCLUSIONS: TRA is a feasible and low-risk alternative for endovascular intervention in the trauma patient. It yields good technical success with low morbidity. Although larger studies are needed to establish the full efficacy of TRA at the multi-institutional level, this single-institution study demonstrates the legitimacy of an alternative means for endovascular intervention in the trauma patient.

Distal transradial access as default approach for coronary angiography and interventions.

BACKGROUND: Distal transradial access (dTRA) as a refinement of the conventional transradial access has advantages in terms of patient and operator comfort and risk of radial artery (RA) occlusion. RA preservation with this new technique could be a relevant issue in patients requiring its future use. In turn, one relevant drawback is the more challenging puncture of a smaller artery. In order to evaluate the real world feasibility and safety of both right (rdTRA) and left (ldTRA) distal transradial access as default access site for routine coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), this prospective observational registry was conducted. METHODS: From February to July 2019, 435 consecutive patients underwent CAG and/or PCI (620 procedures at all, by two experienced transradial operators) through rdTRA or ldTRA. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 62.4 years old. Most were male (66.0%). The majority (49.4%) of patients had an acute coronary syndrome; overall, 15.2% with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). Distal RA was successfully punctured in all patients, always without ultrasound guidance, with puncture and sheath insertion at until 2 attempts in the vast majority of patients. We had only 3.0% access site crossovers (successful arterial puncture but failed sheath insertion), mainly performed via the contralateral dTRA (53.8%). Successful dTRA sheath insertion was then achieved in 98.6% of all 435 patients. Redo ipsilateral dTRA was performed in 2.5% of patients. Distal and proximal RA pulses were palpable in all patients at hospital discharge. No major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and no major complications were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: dTRA as default approach for routine CAG and/or PCI by experienced transradial operators appears to be safe and feasible. Further randomized and larger trials are still needed to assure the clinical benefits and the safety of this new technique.

A comparative observational multicenter analysis of the clinical performance of vascular compression devices following transradial arterial access / Análisis comparativo multicéntrico observacional del desempeño clínico de dispositivos de compresión vascular posterior a acceso arterial transradial

Abstract: Introduction: Multiple vascular compression aimed for transradial access have been developed. We aimed to compare the time required to achieve hemostasis in three different radial vascular compression devices. Methods: ST and non-ST elevation MI, unstable and stable angina as well as diagnostic coronary angiograms patients with transradial vascular access (TVA) in 2 centers were enrolled between June 2010-November 2010. Patients were divided according the TVA compression device (TAVCD) used. Group I received TR Band(tm) (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan), Group II received Neptuno(tm) (Biotronik, Berlin, Deutschland) and Group III received Finale(tm) (Merit Medical, South Jordan, UT).Patients were evaluated immediately after TVACD implantation and 24 hour post-procedure follow up. Results: 60 patients were enrolled in this observational study (Group I = 22 patients; Group II = 18; Group III = 20). All patients demonstrated evidence of radial pulse after hemostasis. 28% developed a superficial hematoma (Group I, 31%; Group II, 30%; Group III, 22%). Pain at the access site was uncommon among patients in both immediate and follow-up evaluations, however, 3% (Group I and II) presented paresthesia immediately following the procedure that resolved by the 24-hour evaluation. Conclusion: In our study, all three evaluated radial compression devices successfully achieved hemostasis regardless of the slight alterations of mechanism, yet similarity in aim of non-occlusive compression. Group I (TR band) had a slight increase in compression time recorded but all groups required an approximate three hours to display no evidence of bleeding. None of the patients in the study presented major vascular complications. We consider that further investigation of radial compression devices as compared to manual compression are necessary to evaluate their advantages and may further simplify the procedure

Resumen: Introducción: Múltiples dispositivos de compresión vascular para el acceso radial han sido desarrollados. Nuestro objetivo es comparar el tiempo requerido para lograr la hemostasis con tres diferentes dispositivos de compresión vascular radial. Métodos: Pacientes de angiografía coronaria de diagnóstico, con elevación y no elevación del ST, con angina de pecho inestable y estable, así como pacientes con acceso vascular radial (AVR) en dos centros, fueron incluidos entre junio y noviembre de 2010. Los pacientes fueron divididos según el dispositivo de compresión AVR (DCAVR) usado. Al Grupo I se le dio el TR Band(tm) (Terumo, Tokio, Japón), el Grupo II recibió el Neptuno(tm) (Biotronik, Berlín, Alemania) y el grupo III recibió el Final(tm) (Merit Medica, South Jordan, UT). Los pacientes fueron evaluados inmediatamente después de la implantación del DCAVR y a las 24 horas de postprocedimiento para seguimiento. Resultados: 60 pacientes fueron incluidos en este estudio observacional (Grupo I = 22 pacientes; Grupo II = 18; Grupo III = 20). Todos los pacientes mostraron evidencia de pulso radial después de la hemostasis. 28% desarrolló un hematoma superficial (Grupo I, 31%; Grupo II, 30%; Grupo III, 22%). El dolor en el sitio de acceso fue poco común entre los pacientes de los dos evaluaciones inmediatas y de seguimiento, sin embargo, el 3% (Grupo I y II) presentó parestesias inmediatamente después del procedimiento que se resolvieron para la evaluación de 24 horas. Conclusión: En nuestro estudio, los tres dispositivos de compresión radiales evaluados lograron con éxito la hemostasis sin importar las pequeñas variaciones del mecanismo, dando resultados similares en el objetivo de la compresión no oclusiva. Grupo I (Banda TR) tuvo un ligero aumento en el tiempo de compresión registrado pero todos los grupos requieren un tiempo aproximado de tres horas para mostrar ninguna evidencia de sangrado. Ninguno de los pacientes en el estudio presentó mayores complicaciones vasculares. Consideramos necesario hacer investigación adicional de los dispositivos de compresión radiales, en comparación con la compresión manual para evaluar sus ventajas y poder simplificar aún más el procedimiento.