Comparison of radial artery occlusion occurrence (RAO) between compression band device and manually applied gauze compression after transradial coronary procedure, a PROBE study

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Hemostasis of the radial artery after transradial coronary procedure can be achieved either manually by means of a gauze or mechanically through a device compression band, and radial artery occlusion (RAO) is one of its common complications. Purpose The study sought to compare the occurrence of RAO between the two hemostasis methods being used after a transradial coronary procedure to determine an effective and safe method that can be recommended for use. Methodology This was a Prospective, Randomized Open-label Blinded Endpoint (PROBE) study. A total of 137 patients undergoing a transradial coronary procedure were randomized equally using block randomization sampling technique. Radial artery patency was evaluated by color duplex ultrasonography within 24-72 hours after the procedure. The primary endpoint was early RAO. Secondary endpoints included complications such as access-site bleeding, pain, and hematoma. Results Three (2.19%) early RAOs occurred, 1 (1.47%) in the band compression device group and 2 (2.9%) in the manual gauze compression group (p= 1.000). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding access-site bleeding [type 1 bleeding, 3 (4.48%) vs 2 (2.90%); p= 0.678]; pain with median pain score of 0 (0-6) vs 0 (0-7); p= 0.742; and hematoma [Grade I: 3 (4.41%)vs 2 (2.9%); Grade II: 0 vs 2 (2.9%); Grade III: none, and Grade IV: 0 vs 2 (2.9%); p= 0.363]. Conclusion Compression Band Device and Manually Applied Gauze Compression have similar rates of early RAO, access-site bleeding, pain, and hematoma.