Comparison of Glidesheath Slender and Subcutaneous Nitrate Administration in Terms of Radial Artery Complications: A Retrospective Single-Center Experience.

Abstract

The transradial route is used in most coronary procedures today. Although this method seems to be advantageous in terms of bleeding complications and patient comfort, the small radial artery diameter brings with it complications such as radial artery spasm and occlusion. It has been demonstrated in previous studies that subcutaneous nitrate administration dilates the radial artery. The Glidesheath Slender, which has a thinner outer wall than conventional sheaths, is another method that has been shown to reduce complications by reducing friction on the radial artery wall. Our aim was to compare these two methods in terms of complications. We retrospectively reviewed patients with complete clinical and radial Doppler ultrasound records who had undergone transradial interventions. We compared procedures using subcutaneous nitrate application plus conventional sheaths with procedures using the Glidesheath Slender sheath in terms of procedural and post-procedural complications. Eighty-seven patients in the subcutaneous nitrate group and 35 patients in the Glidesheath Slender group were included in the study. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of procedural and postprocedural complications (p = 0.511 and p = 0.333, respectively). In cases where a thin-walled sheath such as a Glidesheath Slender is not available, subcutaneous nitrate administration seems to be similar, especially in terms of preventing radial artery spasm.