Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2025

Transradial Access Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients
Published on: September 20, 2020
Femoral vs. radial approach for primary percutaneous intervention in cardiogenic shock: a subanalysis from the
Mohammad Abumayyaleh1, Holger Thiele2, Tienush Rassaf3
1Department of Cardiology, Angiology, Hemostaseology and Medical Intensive Care, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Insights
Femoral access in patients with myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (CS) is linked to higher 30-day mortality compared to radial access. This trend persists even with extracorporeal life support (ECLS), suggesting access site choice is critical for CS outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Critical Care Medicine
Background:
- Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a severe complication of acute coronary syndromes (ACS).
- Early revascularization is crucial for survival in CS patients.
- The influence of vascular access site on outcomes in CS, particularly with extracorporeal life support (ECLS), requires further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of femoral versus radial access site on 30-day mortality and other outcomes in patients with infarct-related CS.
- To assess these outcomes in patients treated with or without ECLS.
Main Methods:
- Subanalysis of the ECLS-SHOCK trial involving patients with infarct-related CS.
- Patients were divided into femoral and radial access groups.
- Primary endpoint: 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints: renal replacement therapy, repeat revascularization, reinfarction, heart failure rehospitalization, neurological outcome, bleeding, and vascular complications.
Main Results:
- Among 415 patients, 72.9% initially intended for femoral access and 26.6% for radial access.
- A significant proportion (22.5%) of patients with intended radial access switched to femoral access.
- Femoral access was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared to radial access in both ECLS and conservative management groups, with a trend in multivariate analysis (RR 1.22; p=0.11).
Conclusions:
- In myocardial infarction-related CS, a substantial number of patients intended for radial access switch to femoral.
- Femoral access shows a trend towards increased 30-day mortality in multivariate analysis.
- The choice of access site may significantly impact outcomes in CS patients.
Aims:
Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening complication of acute coronary syndromes. Early revascularization with treating the culprit lesion improves survival. Nevertheless, the impact of access site (femoral vs. radial) on outcomes in infarct-related CS also in conjunction with extracorporeal life support (ECLS) remains unclear.
Methods And Results:
This subanalysis of the ECLS-SHOCK trial included patients with infarct-related CS treated with or without ECLS, divided into femoral and radial access groups. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints included renal replacement therapy, repeat revascularization, reinfarction, rehospitalization for congestive heart failure, and poor neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Categories 3-5) within 30 days. Safety outcomes included bleeding and peripheral vascular complications. Among 415 patients, percutaneous coronary intervention was initially intended through femoral (n = 304; 72.9%) or radial (n = 111; 26.6%) access. In the intended access site analysis, 25 patients (22.5%) in the radial group switched to femoral access, while 3 patients (1%) in the femoral group switched to radial access prior to or after coronary angiography. At 30 days, the overall mortality rate was higher in the femoral group compared with the radial group (52.0 vs. 37.8%) with a relative risk (RR) of 1.37, a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.06-1.78, and a P-value of 0.011 with no significant differences in the crude rates of secondary and safety endpoints. In the analysis based on the actual access site (as opposed to intended access site used), 7.8% of patients in the ECLS arm switched from radial to femoral, while 7.5% of patients in the conservative arm switched from radial to femoral for or after coronary angiography. Mortality rates were higher in the femoral group for both ECLS arm (52.7 vs. 26.8%; P = 0.003; RR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.16-3.32) and conservative arm (52.2 vs. 37.5%; P = 0.074; RR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.94-2.06). In a multivariate analysis, femoral access was associated with a trend for predicting adjusted 30-day mortality (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.95-1.55; P = 0.11).
Conclusion:
In myocardial infarction-related CS, nearly one-fifth of patients with intended radial access switched to femoral. In multivariate analysis, femoral access was associated with a trend to adversely affect 30-day mortality.
More Related Videos
06:10Utilizing Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
Published on: June 12, 2021
07:39Use of a Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Device/Left Atrium to Femoral Artery Bypass System for Cardiogenic Shock
Published on: August 16, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Assessment 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:
Assessment 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