Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study

We sought to demonstrate that the combination of a local vasodilator (verapamil), modern materials, patent hemostasis, and intravenous anticoagulant only in the case of percutaneous coronary intervention, as compared to default heparin administration after sheath insertion, may optimize a combined endpoint, including radial artery oc-clusion (RAO), radial artery spasm (RAS), and access site complication.

This is a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized trial. Overall, 418 patients undergoing a transradial approach (TRA) for coronary procedures were randomized 1: 1 to receive intraradial verapamil (5 mg) or heparin (5,000 IU) after a 6-Fr sheath insertion. The primary outcome was the 24-h occurrence of RAO (ultrasound confirmation), access site complication, and RAS requiring the bailout administration of vasodilators.

The combined primary outcome occurred in 127 (30%) patients. It was significantly lower in patients randomized to verapamil as compared to others (26 vs. 35%, p = 0.03). This was mainly due to a significant reduction in RAS (3 vs. 10%, p = 0.006). The 24-h and 30-day occurrence of RAO did not differ between the study groups.

Local administration of verapamil versus heparin reduces RAS, without increasing RAO, which appears to be strictly related to radial artery diameter and hemostasis time.