Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 8, 2025
Upper-extremity Approach for Secondary Access in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
Published on: August 8, 2025
Percutaneous radial artery access for peripheral vascular interventions is a safe alternative for upper extremity
Scott R Levin1, Sarah J Carlson2, Alik Farber1
1Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, Mass.
Objective:
Percutaneous radial artery access has been increasingly used for peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs). Our goal was to characterize the practice patterns and perioperative outcomes among patients treated using PVI performed via radial artery access.
Methods:
The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried from 2016 to 2020 for PVI performed via upper extremity access. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to evaluate the periprocedure outcomes of radial artery access cases. A separate sample of brachial artery access cases was used as a comparator.
Results:
A total of 520 radial artery access cases were identified. The mean age was 69 ± 10 years, and 41.3% were women. Most procedures were performed in the hospital outpatient setting (71.7%). The sheath size was ≤5F for 10%, 6F for 78%, and 7F for 12%. Ultrasound-guided access and protamine were used in 68.3% and 17.3% of cases, respectively. The interventions were aortoiliac (55%), femoropopliteal (55%), and infrapopliteal (9%). Stenting and atherectomy were performed in 55% and 19% of cases, respectively, and more often with 7F sheaths. Access site complications were any hematoma (4.8%), including hematomas resulting in intervention (0.8%), pseudoaneurysms (1%), and access stenosis or occlusion (0.8%). On multivariable analysis, sheath size was not associated with access site complications. Percutaneous brachial artery access (n = 1135) compared with radial access was independently associated with more overall hematomas (odds ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.81; P = .03). However, access type was not associated with hematomas resulting in intervention (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-6.72; P = .19).
Conclusions:
PVIs via radial artery access exhibited a low prevalence of postprocedural access site complications and were associated with fewer minor hematoma complications compared with interventions performed using brachial artery access. Radial artery access compared with brachial artery access should be the preferred technique for PVIs.
Related Concept Videos
01:11Assessment of radial pulse
The radial pulse, located at the wrist, is often the preferred site for assessing peripheral pulse because of its accessibility and dependability. The process of determining the radial pulse involves several steps:
01:12Arteries of the Upper Limbs
01:27Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
01:25Hemodialysis I: Introduction
01:25Assessment of apical radial pulse
The A-R pulse assessment involves simultaneous evaluation of the apical and radial pulses. When the apical and radial pulse rates vary, this assessment helps identify a pulse deficit.
Pre-Procedural Preparation
01:27Parentral Nutrition: Centeral and Peripheral Parental Nutrition
PN can be administered through two primary routes:
1. Central Parenteral Nutrition (CPN):
CPN involves delivering a high concentration of nutrients through a large vein. This is typically achieved using a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) or,...