Abstract

ABSTRACT Background The clinical efficacy and safety of transradial (TR) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in comparison to transfemoral (TF) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) is not well studied in literature. Objectives: We sought to study the outcome and complications associated with TR compared with TF for CTO interventions. Methods After a systematic literature search was done in PubMed and EMBASE, we performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing TF and TR for CTO PCI. Results: Twelve studies with 19,309 patients were included. Compared to those who has TF access, individuals who were treated via TR approach had statistically significant lower access complication rates [odds ratio (OR): 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22 to 0.49; p < 0.0001]. The procedural success was in the favor of TR method (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.31–1. 51; p < 0.0001). The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and contrast-induced nephropathy were similar in both groups. Conclusion When compared with TF access interventions in CTO PCI; the TR approach appears to be associated with far less access-site complications, higher procedural success, and comparable MACCE.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call