Comparison between the Right and Left Distal Radial Access for Patients Undergoing Coronary Procedures: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Author:

Rivera Kristian12ORCID,Fernández-Rodríguez Diego12ORCID,Casanova-Sandoval Juan12ORCID,Barriuso Ignacio12ORCID,Zielonka Marta12ORCID,Pueyo-Balsells Nuria12ORCID,Calaf Valls Immaculada12ORCID,Worner Fernando12

Affiliation:

1. University Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida, Spain

2. IRBLLeida (Institut de Recerca Biomèdica de Lleida), Lleida, Spain

Abstract

Introduction. Distal radial access for coronary procedures decreases hemostasis time, prevents radial occlusion, and improves patient comfort compared to conventional transradial access. Initially described for left distal radial access (lDRA), the right distal radial access (rDRA) is feasible. However, there are no comparative studies to date. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the access site on vascular access and procedural performance. Methods. From August 2020 to October 2021, coronary procedures performed through distal radial access were prospectively recorded. After propensity score matching, the rDRA and lDRA were compared. The primary endpoint was the proportion of approach success. The secondary endpoints included access time, coronary procedural success, radial spasm, exposition to ionizing radiation, patient comfort, and vascular access-related complications. Results. From a total of 385 procedures in 382 patients, after a propensity score matching, 182 procedures were compared between the rDRA and lDRA. There were no differences in the baseline characteristics between the groups. Compared to the lDRA, the rDRA presented similar approach success (96.7% vs. 96.7%, p = 1.0 ), less access time (39 (25–60) sec vs. 50 (29–90) sec, p = 0.018 ), comparable coronary procedural success after sheath placement (100% vs. 100%, p = 1.000 ), and not statistically significant radial spasm (2.19% vs. 6.59%, p = 0.148 ). No differences in dose-area product (32 (20–56.2) Gy.m2 vs. 32.3 (19.4–46.3) Gy.m2; p = 0.472 ) and fluoroscopy time (4.4 (2.5–9.1) min vs. 4.3 (2.4–7.5) min, p = 0.251 ) were detected between the groups. No vascular access-related complications were observed in any group. Conclusions. The rDRA, compared to the lDRA, had the same proportion of approach success and procedural performance, with a slight reduction in access time for patients undergoing coronary procedures.

Publisher

Hindawi Limited

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3