Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 23, 2025
Transradial Access Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients
Published on: September 20, 2020
Randomized comparison of Glidesheath Slender with conventional 5Fr arterial sheaths for coronary angiography through
Grigorios G Tsigkas1, Athanasios Ι Moulias2, Panagiota N Spyropoulou2
1Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece - gregtsig@upatras.gr.
Background:
The potential benefits of the thin-walled 5F Glidesheath Slender sheath in the distal transradial access (dTRA) have not been investigated. This study aimed to compare the Glidesheath Slender versus conventional 5Fr arterial sheaths in patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CAG) through the dTRA.
Methods:
A total of 352 consecutive patients with an indication for CAG were randomized (1:1) to Glidesheath Slender 5Fr versus a conventional 5Fr arterial sheath for dTRA. The primary endpoint was the rate of successful hemostasis at 30 minutes after sheath removal. Follow-up ultrasound of the right radial and distal radial artery was performed 7-10 days after the procedure.
Results:
After exclusion of patients where a 6Fr sheath or crossover of access site was required, 108 patients in the Glidesheath Slender and 105 patients in the conventional 5Fr arterial sheath group were included in the analysis. The crossover rate to conventional radial access and the rate of successful hemostasis at 30 minutes after sheath removal were similar between the two groups (18.9% in the Glidesheath slender vs. 22% in the control group; P=0.460, and 62% vs. 51.4%; P=0.118, respectively). The level of pain associated with the procedure was significantly lower in the Glidesheath Slender group (2.69 vs. 3.29 in the control group; P=0.02). No significant difference was recorded between the two groups in the rate of access-related complications.
Conclusions:
Use of Glidesheath Slender for dTRA did not increase the rate of early hemostasis compared with conventional arterial sheath.
