Comparison of Enoxaparin versus Heparin among Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Angiography via Radial Artery Access

Abstract

Background: Radial artery occlusion (RAO) is one of the few postprocedural complications of transradial approach (TRA) which may be symptomatic in some cases. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) for preventing RAO among patients who underwent elective diagnostic coronary artery angiography (CAG) via TRA. Patients and Methods: This randomized clinical trial study was conducted on patients who underwent TRA for elective diagnostic CAG. Then, the patients included were randomly divided into 2 groups. A group received 0.75 mg enoxaparin intravenously and the second group received 70–100 IU/Kg UFH single-bolus dose intravenously. During 24 h after the procedure and 3 months later, all the participants were monitored for the occurrence of RAO, access hematoma, periprocedural myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. Results: From 189 patients with mean age of 52.52 ± 6.23 years old, 95 patients received UFH (70–100 IU/kg), and the other group (n = 94) received enoxaparin after radial sheath insertion. After 24 h, decrease in radial pulse was observed in 17.6% patient (14.9% in UFH group and 20.2% in enoxaparin group) and only one patient had absent radial pulse in UFH group. There were no significant differences between UFH group compared with enoxaparin group in the reduction of the radial pulse that examined with reverse Allen test (P = 0.359). Furthermore, other complications did not differ significantly between the two groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that intravenous enoxaparin administration compared with intravenous UFH during diagnostic CAG via TRA is a safe and effective strategy for preventing RAO at 24 h after the procedure.