Comparing the Safety and Feasibility of Endovascular Therapy via Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches in Patients with Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the Nationwide Registry.

Abstract

Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of performing endovascular therapy (EVT) for aortoiliac artery disease using transradial approach (TRA) as compared to transfemoral approach (TFA). We analyzed 9671 cases with symptomatic lower extremity artery disease due to aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) treated using EVT from a Japanese Nationwide EVT Registry between January and December 2021. We compared the baseline characteristics, procedural information, and 30-day outcomes of patients who received EVT only via TRA (n=863 [16.9%]) and those only via TFA (n=4255 [83.1%]) by using propensity score (PS) matching, after excluding those who required regular dialysis, those who underwent hybrid surgeries, and those who received EVT through 2 or more approach sites. After matching, the final study population consisted of 862 matched patients with similar baseline characteristics in each group. Technical success rate was comparable between the 2 groups (99.3% vs. 99.3%, p>0.99). No significant differences were observed with respect to the composite of all-cause death within 48 hours after EVT and post-procedural complications within 30 days, including severe bleeding that required transfusion, revascularization procedures, urgent surgeries, cerebral infarction, and major limb amputation (0.2% vs. 0.7%, p=0.29). Transradial approach was associated with shorter operation time (85 vs. 90 minutes, p=0.016), but longer fluoroscopy time (26 vs. 20 minutes, p<0.001) and higher contrast agent volume (80 vs. 75 mL, p<0.001). After PS matching, TRA showed the comparable rates of successful EVT and 30-day complications in patients with AIOD compared to TFA. Transradial approach was found to be safe and be a viable alternative of TFA for the treatment of AIOD. The efficacy of transradial approach (TRA) is established in percutaneous coronary intervention; however, its safety and feasibility are unclear in endovascular therapy (EVT). We analyzed 9,671 cases with symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease treated using EVT from a Nationwide Registry to compare the 30-day outcomes of those who received EVT only via TRA (n = 863 [16.9%]and those only via TFA (n=4,255 [83.1%]) by using propensity score matching. Technical success rate (99.3% vs. 99.3%, p > 0.99) and 30-day complications (0.2% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.29) were comparable between the two groups. EVT via TRA could be performed safely.