Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2025
Transradial Access Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients
Published on: September 20, 2020
Coronary procedures via distal transradial access in older as compared with non-older patients: Insights from the
Marcos Danillo Oliveira1, Ednelson Cunha Navarro2, Nathalia Rodrigues Branca3
1Discipline of Cardiology, Interventional Cardiology Unit, Hospital Universitário I, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil; Department of Interventional Cardiology, Hospital Regional do Vale do Paraíba, Taubaté, SP, Brazil.
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.
More Related Videos
10:28Interventional Diagnostic Procedure: A Practical Guide for the Assessment of Coronary Vascular Function
Published on: March 15, 2022
07:25Predicting Amputation using Local Circulating Mononuclear Progenitor Cells in Angioplasty-treated Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia
Published on: September 22, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:24Cardiac Catheterization III: Left Heart Catheterization
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:
01:21Cardiac Catheterization II: Right Heart Catheterization
01:26Cardiac Catheterization IV: Nursing Management
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
01:10Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure