Transfemoral Access Group Research Articles

Transradial and Transfemoral Access for Retrograde Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Comparison of the Clinical Features and Prognostic Implications.

The research was carried out to determine and compare the efficiency of completely transradial access (cTRA) and transfemoral access (TFA) in retrograde chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The cases of retrograde chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention usually need the dual access. The transradial method is now used more frequently in CTO PCI, and improves the safety of CTO PCI. This retrospective, observational study was carried out in a single center. Participants were patients who underwent dual-access retrograde CTO PCI from January 2017 to October 2023, categorized into two groups: cTRA (biradial access) and TFA (bifemoral, or combined radial and femoral access). All patients in the cTRA group received conventional radial access. All punctures of the femoral artery were performed without fluoroscopic or ultrasound guidance. None of the patients in the TFA group accepted any arterial closure devices. Clinical, angiographic and procedural characteristics and the occurrence of in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of the cTRA and TFA procedures were recorded. This research involved 187 CTO PCI procedures with dual access, of which 88 were done using cTRA and the rest (99) were carried out through TFA. The J-CTO (Multicenter Chronic Total Occlusion Registry of Japan) score was lower in the cTRA group than TFA group (2.1± 0.6 vs 3.0± 0.8; P <0.001). The technical success (84.1% vs 82.8%; P= 0.817), procedural success (80.7% vs 79.8%; P= 0.906) and in-hospital MACE rates (5.7% vs 4.0%; P= 0.510) were the same for both groups. For a J-CTO score of 3 or higher, technical success rate was significantly lower in the cTRA group than the TFA group (58.1% vs 74.2%; P < 0.001). In the retrograde CTO PCI, the percentages of success and in-hospital MACE were similar for both cTRA and TFA. Meanwhile, cTRA may be used for simpler lesions (J-CTO score < 3) as compared to TFA.

Femoral versus radial access for middle meningeal artery embolization for chronic subdural hematomas: multicenter propensity score matched study

BackgroundWith transradial access (TRA) being more progressively used in neuroendovascular procedures, we compared TRA with transfemoral access (TFA) in middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) for chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH).MethodsConsecutive patients...

Characteristics and outcome in cardiogenic shock according to vascular access site for percutaneous coronary intervention.

The optimal vascular access site for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) remains uncertain. While observational data favour transradial access (TRA) due to lower complication rates and mortality, transfemoral access (TFA) PCI offers advantages such as shorter access and procedure times, along with quicker escalation to mechanical circulatory support (MCS). In this study, we aimed to investigate factors associated with a transfemoral approach and compare mortality rates between TRA and TFA in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI. Data from a nationwide registry of AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI (2017-2021) were analysed. We compared patient demographics, procedural details, and outcomes between TRA and TFA groups. Logistic regression identified access site factors and radial-to-femoral crossover predictors. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis examined the impact of access site on mortality. Of the 1562 patients, 45% underwent TRA PCI, with an increasing trend over time. Transfemoral access patients were more often female, had a history of coronary artery bypass grafting, lower blood pressure, higher resuscitation and intubation rates, and elevated lactate levels. After PSM, 30-day mortality was lower in TRA (33% vs. 46%, P < 0.001). Predictors for crossover included left coronary artery interventions, multivessel PCI, and MCS initiation. Significant differences exist between TRA and TFA PCI in AMI-CS. Transfemoral access was more common in patients with worse haemodynamics and was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared with TRA. This mortality difference persisted in the PSM analysis.

Ultrasound-Guided Transfemoral Access for Coronary Procedures: A Pooled Learning Curve Analysis From the FAUST and UNIVERSAL Trials.

The learning curve for new operators performing ultrasound-guided transfemoral access (TFA) remains uncertain. We performed a pooled analysis of the FAUST (Femoral Arterial Access With Ultrasound Trial) and UNIVERSAL (Routine Ultrasound Guidance for Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures) trials, both multicenter randomized controlled trials of 1:1 ultrasound-guided versus non-ultrasound-guided TFA for coronary procedures. Outcomes included the composite of major bleeding or vascular complications and successful common femoral artery cannulation. Participants were stratified by the operators' accrued case volume. We used adjusted repeated-measurement logistic regression, with random intercepts for operator clustering, for comparison against the non-ultrasound-guided TFA group and to model the learning curve. The FAUST and UNIVERSAL trials randomized a total of 1624 patients, of which 810 were randomized to non-ultrasound-guided TFA and 814 to ultrasound-guided TFA (cases 1-10, 391; 11-20, 183; and >20, 240). Participants who had operators who performed >20 ultrasound-guided TFAs had a decreased risk for the primary end point (5/240 [2.1%] versus 64/810 [7.9%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.09-0.61]) compared with non-ultrasound-guided TFA. Operators who performed >20 ultrasound-guided procedures had increased odds of successfully cannulating the common femoral artery (224/246 [91.1%] versus 327/382 [85.6%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.08-2.89]) compared with non-ultrasound-guided TFA. The learning curve plots demonstrated growing competence with increasing accrued cases. New operators should perform at least 20 ultrasound-guided TFA to decrease access site complications and increase proper cannulation compared with non-ultrasound-guided TFA. Additional accrued cases may lead to increased proficiency. Training programs should consider these findings in the transradial era.

Comparative Analysis of Transpedal and Transfemoral Access During Genicular Artery Embolization for Knee Osteoarthritis.

This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of transpedal access (TPA) with transfemoral access (TFA) in Genicular Artery Embolization (GAE). 60 patients who underwent GAE between January and June 2023, were recruited and outcomes were compared between the TFA (n = 37) and TPA (n = 23) groups. Technical and clinical success rates, complications, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed. All patients attained a 100% technical success rate, which was defined as the successful selective catheterization and embolization of at least one feeding artery to the knee joint, without encountering any major complications. Minor complications, observed in 12/60 patients (20%), were predominantly manifested as a transient skin discoloration. The TPA group had a comparatively higher (p = 0.008) rate of minor complication than the TFA group. Notably, TPA was associated with a longer duration of the procedure (p = 0.013), duration of fluoroscopy (p = 0.004), increased total air kerma (p = 0.037), dose-area product values (p = 0.021), and a greater incidence of vasospasm (p = 0.018) than TFA. However, TPA patients reported shorter recovery times and less post-procedural discomfort, especially reduced back pain due to postinterventional bedrest (p < 0.001). At the 3-month follow-up, the clinical success rate was similar between the two groups (p = 0.905). TFA is the safer and faster method for GAE, offering fewer complications and reduced radiation exposure. For patients with challenging groin anatomies, however, TPA may provide a valuable alternative.

Transfemoral hepatic vein catheterization reduces procedure time in double vein embolization

BackgroundDouble vein embolization with simultaneous embolization of the portal and hepatic vein aims to grow the future liver remnant in preparation for major hepatectomy. Transvenous hepatic vein embolization is usually done via a transjugular access. The purpose of this study is to describe the transfemoral approach as an alternative option and to discuss potential advantages.ResultsTwenty-three patients undergoing hepatic vein embolization via a transjugular (n = 10) or transfemoral access (n = 13) were evaluated retrospectively. In all cases the portal vein embolization was done first. All procedures were technically successful. There were no peri-interventional complications. Only two patients were not able to proceed to surgery. Standardized future liver remnant hypertrophy was non-inferior with the transfemoral approach compared to the transjugular route. Procedure time was significantly shorter in the transfemoral access group (40 ± 13 min) compared to the transjugular group (67 ± 13 min, p < 0.001).ConclusionTransfemoral hepatic vein embolization is feasible, safe, and faster due to easier catheterization, improved stability, and simpler patient preparation. These findings will need to be validated in larger studies.

Distal Transradial Access in the Anatomical Snuffbox for Interventional Coronary Procedures: Analysis of Access Site Pain and Complications.

A novel arterial access distally on the radial artery through the anatomical snuffbox has been recently described for coronary interventional procedures. However, there is insufficient data comparing the advantages and limitations of distal transradial access (dTRA), conventional transradial access (TRA), and transfemoral access (TFA). The aim of this study was to compare the three access sites regarding local pain and complications during or after coronary interventional procedures. This prospective observational single-center study included 211 patients undergoing cardiac catheterization or percutaneous coronary intervention, divided into three groups: dTRA (n=69), TRA (n=71), and TFA (n=71). The access site was chosen at the discretion of three operators. We administered a questionnaire to all patients, addressing local pain or discomfort during or after the procedure and the occurrence of possible complications such as distal pallor, local bleeding, and purple color on the access site. Pain on the access site during the procedure was reported more frequently in the TRA group (dTRA 15.9% vs. TRA 32.4% vs. TFA 15.5%). There were no differences in the occurrence of local pain after the procedure in all three groups (29.6% in the dTRA group, 28.2% in the TRA group, and 26.8% in the TFA group). Pain intensity, when it occurred, was higher in the dTRA group (dTRA 5.8 vs. TRA 4.8 vs. TFA 4.6 on a 1-10 scale), as was its duration (dTRA 13.7 vs. TRA 7.6 vs. TFA 8.2 days). Only two local bleeding events were reported, both in the TFA group. No major complications were recorded. The occurrence of local pain on the puncture site after coronary interventional procedures did not differ among the three groups. The dTRA group presented a lower incidence of pain during the procedure when compared to TRA and a lower incidence of purple color when compared to TFA. However, pain intensity and duration were higher in the dTRA group when pain was reported. Using dTRA for coronary procedures is a feasible and safe strategy in selected cases.

Impact of Access Site on Periprocedural Bleeding and Cerebral and Coronary Events in High-Bleeding-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Findings from the RIVA-PCI Trial.

The preference for using transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) in patients requiring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is based on evidence suggesting that TRA is associated with less bleeding and fewer vascular complications, shorter hospital stays, improved quality of life, and a potential beneficial effect on mortality. We have limited study data comparing the two access routes in a patient population with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PCI, who have a particular increased risk of bleeding, while AF itself is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism. Using data from the RIVA-PCI registry, which includes patients with AF undergoing PCI, we analyzed a high-bleeding-risk (HBR) cohort. These patients were predominantly on oral anticoagulants (OAC) for AF, and the PCI was performed via radial or femoral access. Endpoints examined were in-hospital bleeding (BARC 2-5), cerebral events (TIA, hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke) and coronary events (stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction). Out of 1636 patients, 854 (52.2%) underwent TFA, while 782 (47.8%) underwent the procedure via TRA, including nine patients with brachial artery puncture. The mean age was 75.5years. Groups were similar in terms of age, sex distribution, AF type, cardiovascular history, risk factors, and comorbidities, except for a higher incidence of previous bypass surgeries, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) < 60ml/min in the TFA group. No clinically relevant differences in antithrombotic therapy and combinations were present at the time of PCI. However, upon discharge, transradial PCI patients had a higher rate of triple therapy, while dual therapy was preferred after transfemoral procedures. Radial access was more frequently chosen for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and unstable angina pectoris (UAP) cases (NSTEMI 26.6% vs. 17.0%, p < 0.0001; UAP 21.5% vs. 14.5%, p < 0.001), while femoral access was more common for elective PCI (60.3% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.0001). No differences were observed for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Both groups had similar rates of cerebral events (TFA 0.2% vs. TRA 0.3%, p = 0.93), but the TFA group had a higher incidence of bleeding (BARC 2-5) (4.2% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.01), mainly driven by BARC 3 bleeding (1.5% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were found for stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction (TFA 0.2% vs. TRA 0.3%, p = 0.93; TFA 0.4% vs. TRA 0.1%, p = 0.36). In HBR patients with AF undergoing PCI for acute or chronic coronary syndrome, the use of TRA might be associated with a decrease in in-hospital bleeding, while not increasing the risk of embolic or ischemic events compared to femoral access. Further studies are required to confirm these preliminary findings.

Application of transradial and transfemoral accesses during hepatic artery chemoembolization in the treatment of patients with malignant liver neoplasms

Introduction Malignant neoplasms of the liver are one of the most common pathologies in oncology. Chemoembolization of the hepatic artery is currently widely used in the treatment of unresectable liver tumors. Transradial vascular access is actively used in interventional cardiology due to fewer local vascular complications. At the same time, until recently, chemoembolization of the hepatic artery was more often performed via transfemoral vascular access.The aim of the work is a comparative analysis of the results of transradial and transfemoral vascular accesses for the purpose of hepatic artery chemoembolization.Material and methods The data of 69 patients who underwent 212 hepatic artery chemoembolization procedures for malignant neoplasms in the liver were analyzed. The group of transradial access included 107 (50.5 %) interventions, the group of transfemoral access – 105 (49.5 %). The groups were comparable in terms of the main initial clinical and anamnestic data.Results Chemoembolization of the hepatic artery was successfully performed in 98.1 % in the transradial access group and 99 % in the transfemoral access group (p = 1.0). The total duration of intervention, time spent on catheterization of the target artery and radiation exposure were significantly shorter in the transradial access group than in the opposite group. The incidence of local vascular complications was not significantly different between the groups: 11 (10.3 %) and 12 (11.4 %) cases, respectively (p = 0.79). According to the results of patient interviews, the use of transradial access was accompanied by significantly less discomfort associated with the procedure.Discussion Traditionally, embolization of peripheral arteries is performed via transfemoral access, and the total incidence of local vascular complications (large subcutaneous hematomas, false aneurysms, arterovenous fistulas, etc.) is relatively high. According to the results of studies, it is possible to reduce the incidence of local vascular complications without increasing the cost of the procedure by performing the same interventions using transradial access.Conclusion Transradial vascular access has a number of significant advantages over transfemoral access, and therefore can be recommended as a priority for performing hepatic artery chemoembolization.

Comparison of Transradial Access and Transfemoral Access for Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography in the Elderly Population

Evaluate the efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction of transradial access (TRA) compared with conventional transfemoral access (TFA) for diagnostic cerebral angiography in elderly patients (≥65 years of age). We performed a retrospective review of patients receiving cerebral angiography via TRA or TFA between October 2020 and December 2021 at 3 institutions. Basic patient characteristics, angiographic data, postoperative complications, and patient satisfaction were collected for analysis. Of the 357 enrolled elderly patients, 175 were performed through TRA and 182 were performed through TFA. There was no significant difference in mean fluoroscopy time (8.6 ± 3.8 minutes vs. 9.1 ± 3.1 minutes; P= 0.103) and radiation exposure (47.7 ± 10.8 Gy-cm2 vs. 49.8 ± 11.3 Gy-cm2; P= 0.068) between the TRA and TFA groups. However, the TRA group had a shorter procedural time (54.7 ± 6.2 minutes vs. 61.1 ± 5.6 minutes; P < 0.001) and less contrast agent (83.2 ± 28.1 mL vs. 100.1 ± 26.2 mL; P < 0.001) than the TFA group. In terms of safety, the incidence of minor vascular access complications in the TRA group was lower than that in the TFA group (1.7% vs. 8.8%; P= 0.003). The incidence of serious complications and neurologic complications in the TRA group was also lower, although the difference was not statistically significant. Overall patient satisfaction was higher in the TRA group than that in the TFA group. TRA was an efficient and safe alternative to conventional TFA in elderly patients who underwent diagnostic cerebral angiography and who underwent TRA were more satisfied. Findings supported the radial-first strategy for cerebral angiography in elderly populations.

Transradial and transfemoral accesses for cerebral angiography: a retrospective comparative study

ABSTRACT Objective Many large randomized trials in interventional cardiology have shown a significant advantage of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA). However, TRA has yet been widely used in Neurovascular interventional surgery. The purpose of this retrospective comparative study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of transradial and transfemoral accesses for cerebral angiography. Methods A total of 380 patients underwent cerebral angiography in our center between January 2019 and January 2021. Among them, 192 patients underwent TRA, and 188 patients via TFA. The success rate of cerebral angiography, X-ray time, total absorbed dose, dose-area product (DAP), complications, and other clinical data were extracted. Results The operative success (94.27% vs 97.87%; P = 0.071) and the puncture failure (1.56% vs 1.60%) were not significantly different between the TRA and TFA groups. Only arterial spasm, which is more common in the TRA group, was substantially different between the two groups in terms of surgical consequences (P = 0.015). In addition, there were no significant differences between the groups in total absorbed dose (P = 0.604) and DAP(P = 0.097). However, the X-ray time of the TRA group [281.50(216.30,342.00)] was shorter than the TFA group [296.50(230.80,363.50)] (P = 0.019). Conclusions TRA is effective and safe in cerebral angiography, and its use may be expanded.

Transradial versus transfemoral access for mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: A retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare procedural and clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) treated via transradial access (TRA) mechanical thrombectomy (MT) versus conventional transfemoral access (TFA). MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with AIS treated with TRA versus TFA MT at our tertiary comprehensive stroke center. Access choice was individualized based on occlusion site, aortic and arch anatomy. Outcomes were extracted from our institutional stroke registry and included procedural time, Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) reperfusion score, NIHSS, 90-day mRS and 90-day mortality. Comparisons were performed using Student t-Test and Fischer's exact test as appropriate. Results175 mechanical thrombectomies were performed during the study interval; 39 (22%) were performed via TRA and 136 (79%) TFA. Access to reperfusion time was 36.3 ± 24.5 minutes in the TRA group and 21.9 ± 17.6 in the TFA group (p<0.001). The proportion of patients with a TICI reperfusion score of 2b or 3 was similar in both groups (TRA: 34 (87%) vs. TFA: 121 (89%) p=0.559. The median 90-day mRS was similar between both groups (p=0.170), as was the 90-day mortality (p = 0.509). ConclusionsWhile TFA is faster in our cohort, TFA and TRA are both safe and effective for MT in acute ischemic stroke. While TFA remains mainstay, TRA can be valuable in variant anatomy despite its technical limitations. Individualizing access based on advanced imaging and patient factors may improve practice; however, updates in catheter and access technology are necessary to optimize outcomes with TRA.

Operator radiation exposure during radioembolisation of the liver: transfemoral versus transradial access using real-time dose monitoring.

In this study, operator radiation exposure is compared utilising transradial access (TRA) versus transfemoral access (TFA) during transarterial radioembolisation (TARE) of liver tumors. Patients who underwent Y90 TARE between May 2017 and April 2018 were included. Electronic medical records and interventional data were collected and the following parameters evaluated: technical success, fluoroscopy time, operator radiation exposure and rate of operator radiation exposure per fluoroscopy time. Statistical analysis was performed with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. A total of 22 patients (12 males, 10 females) underwent 22 procedures. A total of 12 procedures were performed via TFA and 10 via TRA. Technical success was 100% in both groups. Median fluoroscopy time (10minutes for TRA vs 6.4minutes for TFA, p=0.082) was not statistically different. Both operator radiation exposure (49 vs 4.2μSv, p=0.00016) and rate of operator exposure (4.9 vs 0.71μSv per min, p=0.00021) were significantly higher in the TRA versus TFA groups, respectively.

Impact of transradial versus transfemoral access for preprocedural coronary angiography on TAVR-associated complications.

Vascular injury and bleeding complications remain frequent after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Whether the access-site of preprocedural coronary angiography (CAG) affects TAVR-related complications is not known. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of transradial (TRA) versus transfemoral access (TFA) for preprocedural CAG on outcomes in patients undergoing subsequent TAVR. The study cohort included 1002 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, of whom 39.4% (395/1002) had undergone radial and 60.6% (607/1002) femoral access for pre-TAVR CAG. The primary endpoint was a composite of 30-day mortality and major vascular complications after TAVR. Key secondary endpoints included VARC-3-defined complications. The primary endpoint occurred less frequently in patients with prior TRA (3.3%) as compared to patients with prior TFA (6.3%, p=0.04), which was mainly driven by significantly lower rates of major vascular complications (0.8% vs 2.5%, p=0.05). Moreover, incidences of periprocedural access-related vascular injury and unplanned endovascular interventions were lower in TRA patients (13.2% vs 18.0%, p=0.05). The rate of major bleeding tended to be lower in the TRA (1.5%) as compared to the TFA group (3.5%) but was not significantly different (p=0.07). Moreover, the rate of life-threatening bleeding was comparable between both groups (0.5% vs 0.8%, p=0.71). Transradial access for preprocedural CAG was associated with significantly lower rates of vascular complications following subsequent TAVR as compared to transfemoral access. However, despite the tendency to lower major bleedings with transradial access, no significant association was detectable between the access-site of coronary angiography and TAVR-related bleeding complications.

Abstract Number ‐ 156: Transradial versus Transfemoral Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Meta‐Analysis of Nine Studies (2,161 Patients)

Introduction Previous studies have compared the transradial access (TRA) with the transfemoral access (TFA) in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We conducted this meta‐analysis to provide comprehensive evidence regarding the comparison of procedural and clinical outcomes of the TRA versus the TFA in AIS patients undergoing MT. Methods We performed a comprehensive literature search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL) from inception until 1 May 2022. All duplicates were removed, and all references of the included studies were screened manually for any eligible studies. The full‐text articles of eligible abstracts were retrieved and screened for continued eligibility. Relevant data were extracted and then analyzed. For outcomes that constitute continuous data, the mean difference (MD) between the two groups and its standard deviation (SD) were pooled. For outcomes that constitute dichotomous data, the frequency of events and the total number of patients in each group were pooled as odds ratio (OR) between the two groups. Results Nine studies were included in this meta‐analysis, all of which were observational studies. The population of the studies was homogenous comprising a total of 2,161 patients who underwent MT, including 446 in the TRA group and 1,715 in the TFA group. There were no significant differences across the two groups in terms of successful recanalization (Thrombolysis in cerebral Infarction [TICI] score of 2b‐3: OR 0.83, 95% CI [0.55 to 1.25], P = 0.36) (Figure 1, A), complete recanalization (TICI 3: OR 1.16, 95% CI [0.50 to 2.68], P = 0.73), favorable functional outcome (90‐day modified Rankin scale [mRS] score of 0–2 (OR 0.86, 95% CI [0.53 to 1.41], P = 0.56), first‐pass reperfusion (OR 0.88, 95% CI [0.64 to 1.19], P = 0.41), number of passes (MD 0.12, 95% CI [‐0.18 to 0.42], P = 0.43) (Figure 1, B), access‐to‐reperfusion time (MD ‐3.92 minutes, 95% CI [‐9.49 to 1.65], P = 0.17), the amount of contrast used (MD 5.03 mL, 95% CI [‐20.27 to 30.33], P = 0.70), or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR 0.86, 95% CI [0.47 to 1.57], P = 0.62). However, access‐site complications were significantly less frequent in the TRA group as compared to the TFA group (OR 0.18, 95% CI [0.06 to 0.51], P = 0.001) (Finger 1, C). Conclusions In patients undergoing MT for AIS, the collective evidence suggests that the TRA seems to result in lower rates of access‐site complications than the TFA without any significant compromise in other clinical or procedural metrics. Large prospective studies are warranted.

Transradial Versus Transfemoral Intraoperative Cerebral Angiography for Open Cerebrovascular Surgery: Effectiveness, Safety, and Learning Curve.

Intraoperative cerebral angiography (IOA) is a valuable adjunct in open and hybrid cerebrovascular surgery. Commonly, transfemoral access (TFA) is used. Lately, transradial access (TRA) has gained popularity for neurointervention. However, the TRA has not yet been compared with the TFA for IOA. To compare the effectiveness and safety of the TRA and TFA for IOA. In addition, the learning curve for implementing the TRA for IOA was evaluated. Between July 2020 and 2022, 92/1787 diagnostic cerebral angiographies met inclusion criteria for IOA. Sheath run time to primary target vessel run time (STT), amount of contrast dye (CD), fluoroscopy time (FT), and dose-area products (DAPs) were compared between TRA and TFA, different aortic arch types, and both study years. One case required transitioning from TRA to TFA (1/26, 3.8%) because of a minute proximal radial vasculature. The STT, CD, FT, and DAP were similar for the TRA (n = 25) and the TFA groups (n = 67) (p = ns). One groin hematoma (1.5%) was observed in the TFA group. No other complications or any change in modified Rankin Scale were observed. Aortic arch type II/III was associated with longer STT ( P = .032) but not CD, FT, or DAP. There was a nonsignificant decline of STTs among the TRA cases ( P = .104) but stable STTs among TFA cases ( P = .775). The TRA and TFA represent equally effective and safe routes for IOA. In addition, expertise with the TRA can rapidly be gained and facilitates tailoring the access for IOA to patient's individual anatomy and surgeon's needs.

The comparative analysis of transradial and transfemoral vascular approaches for chemoembolization of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive malignant neoplasms, and the results of treatment of which remain extremely unsatisfactory. One of the methods to increase the effectiveness of surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer is selective oil chemoembolization of the pancreatic arteries. Transfemoral access is typically used as a vascular access during this type of intervention, in which complications from the vascular access are often observed.&#x0D; AIM: This study aimed to analyze the results of the use of transradial and transfemoral approaches for chemoembolization of pancreatic cancer.&#x0D; MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the results of chemoembolization of pancreatic arteries in 32 patients with pancreatic cancer. Transfemoral access was used in 16 (50%) patients and transradial access in 16 (50%) patients. According to the main clinical and anamnestic data, both groups were comparable. The endpoints of the study were technical success and complication rate of chemoembolization, total duration of the procedure, time needed for catheterization of the target artery, radiation exposure, and degree of discomfort for the patient.&#x0D; RESULTS: Chemoembolization of pancreatic arteries was successfully performed in 100% of patients in both groups. Major vascular complications were observed in three (18.8%) patients in the transfemoral access group and in one (6.3%) in the transradial access group (p=0.6). The total duration of the procedure and the time needed for catheterization of the target artery were 54.546.61 and 51.306.46 min (p=0.17) and 12.7 and 13.25 min (p=0.72), respectively. Radiation exposure was 0.680.10 mSv in the transfemoral access group and 0.650.10 mSv in the transradial access group (р=0.4). Transradial access was associated with a statistically significant reduction in all parameters of procedural discomfort.&#x0D; CONCLUSION: In terms of efficiency and safety of use, the transradial approach is not inferior to the traditional transfemoral approach, and in terms of patient comfort, it can be recommended as a priority for chemoembolization of the pancreatic arteries.

Access Site Selection and Outcomes for Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: Insights from the VA CART Program.

There has been increasing use of transradial access (TRA) for non-chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There are limited data on TRA for CTO PCI. The objectives of this study were to assess the temporal trends in the use of TRA versus transfemoral access (TFA), identify procedural and lesion characteristics associated with the use of TRA and TFA, and evaluate the association of access site with procedural complications and technical success among veterans undergoing attempted CTO PCI. We performed a retrospective analysis of veteran patients who underwent attempted CTO PCI to compare outcomes between TRA and TFA. Patients who had undergone attempted PCI of at least 1 CTO were included. Propensity score matching was used to evaluate the composite primary outcome of major procedural complications, in-hospital bleeding, or 30-day mortality and the secondary outcome of procedural success. In total, 4609 patients underwent attempted CTO PCI during 2010-2017. Rates of TRA for CTO PCI increased significantly, from 7% in 2010 to 38% in 2017 (P trend < .01). A greater percentage of CTO lesions in the TFA group was calcified and >20.0 mm in length. TRA was not associated with a reduction in the composite primary outcome (TRA 3.3% vs TFA 4.0%, P = .47) or procedural success (TRA 66.6% vs TFA 65.7%, P = .74) compared with TFA. In this retrospective analysis of patients who underwent attempted CTO PCI, the proportion of TRA for CTO PCI has increased over time but was not associated with a greater safety or procedural success than TFA.

Use of reverse angle guide catheter with trans-radial approach in patients undergoing middle meningeal artery embolization.

Trans-radial access (TRA) for MMA embolization has grown due to lower access site complications and greater patient satisfaction. Here, we describe the feasibility of utilizing a 6F Envoy Simmons 2 (6F-SIM2) as a guide catheter with TRA and compare outcomes with trans-femoral approach (TFA) in a single center case series. We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent MMA embolization for management of chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH). TRA was performed by utilizing a combination of 6F 90cm Envoy (Codman & Shurtleff, Inc., Rayham, MA) Simmons 2 guide catheter and 5F 125cm Sofia (Microvention, Aliso Viejo, CA) intermediate catheter. Outcomes measured are Modified Rankin Score (mRS) at 90 days, inpatient mortality, post-embolization recurrence, fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure. A total of 71 patients underwent 97 MMA embolization overall with 65 (67%) in trans-femoral access group, 11 (11.3%) in trans-radial access without use of Simmons 2 Guide catheter group and 21 (21.6%) in trans-radial access with use of Simmons 2 Guide catheter group. There were no direct access-related complications in either group. One patient had thromboembolic stroke in trans-femoral group. There was no difference in average procedure-related total fluro time or radiation dose among all three groups. Trans-radial approach using 6F-SIM2 guide catheter coupled with 5F Sofia intermediate catheter is safe and effective. It provides an alternative approach to access distal branches of bilateral anterior circulation in elderly patients with difficult anatomy undergoing MMA embolization.

Vascular access in complex high-risk but indicated percutaneous coronary interventions (CHiP) types, trends, and outcomes

Abstract Background Radial access improves the safety of PCI; however, its role in Complex, High-risk but indicated Percutaneous coronary interventions (CHiP) remains poorly studied. Objectives To examine CHiP types, clinical and procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes according to vascular access. Methods Data was obtained from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society. We compared the baseline characteristics of 125,662 CHiP procedures performed electively between 2006 and 2017 stratified by access site. Multivariate regression analyses was used to investigate the access site specific odds for in-hospital death, bleeding, and major cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE). Results Overall, 61,825 CHiP procedures (49.2%) were performed via transradial access (TRA) and 63,837 (50.8%) via trans-femoral access (TFA). TRA use increased over time (14.6% in 2006 to 78.4% in 2017). The patients who had PCI through TRA were older (Median age: TRA, 71.2 vs TFA, 70.2 years). Cardiovascular risks were more prevalent in the TRA than TFA (stroke: 5.3 vs 4.3%; hypertension: 67.4 vs 64.3%; peripheral vascular disease: 7.2 vs 6.7%; smoking: 9.6 vs 8.9% respectively; p&amp;lt;0.001 for all). TRA patients had higher rates of multi-vessel PCI than TFA (two or more vessel PCI: 27.2 vs 24.2% respectively; p&amp;lt;0.001) and longer lesions (median stent length: 24mm vs 23mm). TFA group had higher rates of diabetes (26.6 vs 25.8%), previous myocardial infarction (44.2 vs 40.2%), previous PCI (38.7 vs 37.1%), heart failure (10.3 vs 9.3%), respectively (p&amp;lt;0.001 for all) suggesting operators' tendency to choose TFA in patients with greater cardiometabolic burden. TRA adoption was more prevalent in most CHiP types (elderly (54%), chronic renal failure (55.7%), poor LV function (51.4%), left main PCI (51.2%), treatment for severe vascular calcifications (53.1%)). Following adjustment for differences in clinical and procedural characteristics, TFA was independently associated with increased odds for mortality (aOR: 1.4 (1.1–1.8), p=0.004), bleeding (aOR: 2.9 (2.4–3.5), p&amp;lt;0.001), and MACCE (aOR: 1.2 (1.1–1.3), p&amp;lt;0.001). Conclusion Over the 12 years, TRA has become the predominant access site used in CHiP PCI and is associated with significantly lower mortality, major bleeding and MACCE odds than TFA. Addressing the cardiometabolic burden-treatment paradox by preferentially selecting TRA as the baseline cardiovascular burden increases may potentially improve CHiP clinical outcomes. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): An unrestricted educational grant from Abbott supports Warkaa Shamkhani's salary. However, the company had no role in the study design, manuscript preparation, or access to the manuscript's contents before submission. The authors are solely responsible for this study design and conduct and all analysis, drafting, and editing of the manuscript and its final content.