Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach
Abstract Background Most patients undergo coronary angiography by transradial approach. However, recently distal radial approach has been introduced as a novel approach for coronary angiography and intervention. There is uncertainty on the feasibility and safety of distal radial approach for coronar...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European heart journal 2020-11, Vol.41 (Supplement_2) |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | Supplement_2 |
| container_start_page | |
| container_title | European heart journal |
| container_volume | 41 |
| creator | Kajiya, T Takaoka, J Mukai, R Inoue, T Ninomiya, T Kitazono, K Miyamura, A Atsuchi, Y Atsuchi, N Ohishi, M |
| description | Abstract
Background
Most patients undergo coronary angiography by transradial approach. However, recently distal radial approach has been introduced as a novel approach for coronary angiography and intervention. There is uncertainty on the feasibility and safety of distal radial approach for coronary angiography.
Methods
All consecutive 1450 coronary angiography cases (distal radial approach 237 cases, conventional transradial approach 1213 cases) between October 2018 and December 2019 were included in this study. Emergency coronary angiography cases and ad hoc coronary intervention cases were excluded. Patients were stratified into distal radial approach and conventional radial approach subgroups. Baseline characteristics, contrast amount, procedure time, radiation amount, fluoroscopy time, and complications in catheterization laboratory were statistically analyzed.
Results
There were no significant differences in age and gender between distal radial vs transradial groups: mean age, 70.8±10.5 vs 70.8±11.0 years; % of males, 77.2% vs 66.9%. Procedure time was significantly shorter in distal radial approach group (28.7±13.3 min vs 32.3±14.2 min, p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>oup_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_ehjci_ehaa946_2456</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c816-9689dc972d0bb7eb87d5ce7e8ee405d51999470d170487039de2b89e0c58ddfa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwApz8AATsNP47ooo_qRIceuAWbex16qrEkZ0e-va4tA_AZecwM6vRR8g9Z4-cmcUTbrY2lAtgGvlYN0JekBkXdV0Z2YhLMmPciEpK_X1NbnLeMsa05HJG-q8EdgoW6QjThGnID9Qj5NCFXZgOFAZH0ftgwR5o9NTGFAdIxUglffT7EPsE4-ZA9zkMPXUhT7CjCVwoAuOYItjNLbnysMt4d9Y5Wb--rJfv1erz7WP5vKqs5rKM1cZZo2rHuk5hp5UTFhVqxIYJJ7gxplHMccUardjCOKw7bZBZoZ3zsJiT-vTWpphzQt-OKfyUvS1n7ZFU-0eqPZNqj6RKqTqV4n78T_4XopJwUQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kajiya, T ; Takaoka, J ; Mukai, R ; Inoue, T ; Ninomiya, T ; Kitazono, K ; Miyamura, A ; Atsuchi, Y ; Atsuchi, N ; Ohishi, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Kajiya, T ; Takaoka, J ; Mukai, R ; Inoue, T ; Ninomiya, T ; Kitazono, K ; Miyamura, A ; Atsuchi, Y ; Atsuchi, N ; Ohishi, M</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
Background
Most patients undergo coronary angiography by transradial approach. However, recently distal radial approach has been introduced as a novel approach for coronary angiography and intervention. There is uncertainty on the feasibility and safety of distal radial approach for coronary angiography.
Methods
All consecutive 1450 coronary angiography cases (distal radial approach 237 cases, conventional transradial approach 1213 cases) between October 2018 and December 2019 were included in this study. Emergency coronary angiography cases and ad hoc coronary intervention cases were excluded. Patients were stratified into distal radial approach and conventional radial approach subgroups. Baseline characteristics, contrast amount, procedure time, radiation amount, fluoroscopy time, and complications in catheterization laboratory were statistically analyzed.
Results
There were no significant differences in age and gender between distal radial vs transradial groups: mean age, 70.8±10.5 vs 70.8±11.0 years; % of males, 77.2% vs 66.9%. Procedure time was significantly shorter in distal radial approach group (28.7±13.3 min vs 32.3±14.2 min, p<0.05) and total radiation amount during procedure was significantly less in distal radial approach group (366.4±189.5 ml vs 412.9±220.3 mGy, p<0.05).
Conclusions
Coronary angiography with distal radial approach decreases the procedure time and total radiation amount. It is feasible and safe in most stable patients.
Funding Acknowledgement
Type of funding source: None</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-668X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-9645</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>European heart journal, 2020-11, Vol.41 (Supplement_2)</ispartof><rights>Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kajiya, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Takaoka, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mukai, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inoue, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ninomiya, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitazono, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miyamura, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atsuchi, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atsuchi, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ohishi, M</creatorcontrib><title>Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach</title><title>European heart journal</title><description>Abstract
Background
Most patients undergo coronary angiography by transradial approach. However, recently distal radial approach has been introduced as a novel approach for coronary angiography and intervention. There is uncertainty on the feasibility and safety of distal radial approach for coronary angiography.
Methods
All consecutive 1450 coronary angiography cases (distal radial approach 237 cases, conventional transradial approach 1213 cases) between October 2018 and December 2019 were included in this study. Emergency coronary angiography cases and ad hoc coronary intervention cases were excluded. Patients were stratified into distal radial approach and conventional radial approach subgroups. Baseline characteristics, contrast amount, procedure time, radiation amount, fluoroscopy time, and complications in catheterization laboratory were statistically analyzed.
Results
There were no significant differences in age and gender between distal radial vs transradial groups: mean age, 70.8±10.5 vs 70.8±11.0 years; % of males, 77.2% vs 66.9%. Procedure time was significantly shorter in distal radial approach group (28.7±13.3 min vs 32.3±14.2 min, p<0.05) and total radiation amount during procedure was significantly less in distal radial approach group (366.4±189.5 ml vs 412.9±220.3 mGy, p<0.05).
Conclusions
Coronary angiography with distal radial approach decreases the procedure time and total radiation amount. It is feasible and safe in most stable patients.
Funding Acknowledgement
Type of funding source: None</description><issn>0195-668X</issn><issn>1522-9645</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwApz8AATsNP47ooo_qRIceuAWbex16qrEkZ0e-va4tA_AZecwM6vRR8g9Z4-cmcUTbrY2lAtgGvlYN0JekBkXdV0Z2YhLMmPciEpK_X1NbnLeMsa05HJG-q8EdgoW6QjThGnID9Qj5NCFXZgOFAZH0ftgwR5o9NTGFAdIxUglffT7EPsE4-ZA9zkMPXUhT7CjCVwoAuOYItjNLbnysMt4d9Y5Wb--rJfv1erz7WP5vKqs5rKM1cZZo2rHuk5hp5UTFhVqxIYJJ7gxplHMccUardjCOKw7bZBZoZ3zsJiT-vTWpphzQt-OKfyUvS1n7ZFU-0eqPZNqj6RKqTqV4n78T_4XopJwUQ</recordid><startdate>20201101</startdate><enddate>20201101</enddate><creator>Kajiya, T</creator><creator>Takaoka, J</creator><creator>Mukai, R</creator><creator>Inoue, T</creator><creator>Ninomiya, T</creator><creator>Kitazono, K</creator><creator>Miyamura, A</creator><creator>Atsuchi, Y</creator><creator>Atsuchi, N</creator><creator>Ohishi, M</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201101</creationdate><title>Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach</title><author>Kajiya, T ; Takaoka, J ; Mukai, R ; Inoue, T ; Ninomiya, T ; Kitazono, K ; Miyamura, A ; Atsuchi, Y ; Atsuchi, N ; Ohishi, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c816-9689dc972d0bb7eb87d5ce7e8ee405d51999470d170487039de2b89e0c58ddfa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kajiya, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Takaoka, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mukai, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inoue, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ninomiya, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitazono, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miyamura, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atsuchi, Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atsuchi, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ohishi, M</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>European heart journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kajiya, T</au><au>Takaoka, J</au><au>Mukai, R</au><au>Inoue, T</au><au>Ninomiya, T</au><au>Kitazono, K</au><au>Miyamura, A</au><au>Atsuchi, Y</au><au>Atsuchi, N</au><au>Ohishi, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach</atitle><jtitle>European heart journal</jtitle><date>2020-11-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>Supplement_2</issue><issn>0195-668X</issn><eissn>1522-9645</eissn><abstract>Abstract
Background
Most patients undergo coronary angiography by transradial approach. However, recently distal radial approach has been introduced as a novel approach for coronary angiography and intervention. There is uncertainty on the feasibility and safety of distal radial approach for coronary angiography.
Methods
All consecutive 1450 coronary angiography cases (distal radial approach 237 cases, conventional transradial approach 1213 cases) between October 2018 and December 2019 were included in this study. Emergency coronary angiography cases and ad hoc coronary intervention cases were excluded. Patients were stratified into distal radial approach and conventional radial approach subgroups. Baseline characteristics, contrast amount, procedure time, radiation amount, fluoroscopy time, and complications in catheterization laboratory were statistically analyzed.
Results
There were no significant differences in age and gender between distal radial vs transradial groups: mean age, 70.8±10.5 vs 70.8±11.0 years; % of males, 77.2% vs 66.9%. Procedure time was significantly shorter in distal radial approach group (28.7±13.3 min vs 32.3±14.2 min, p<0.05) and total radiation amount during procedure was significantly less in distal radial approach group (366.4±189.5 ml vs 412.9±220.3 mGy, p<0.05).
Conclusions
Coronary angiography with distal radial approach decreases the procedure time and total radiation amount. It is feasible and safe in most stable patients.
Funding Acknowledgement
Type of funding source: None</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456</doi></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0195-668X |
| ispartof | European heart journal, 2020-11, Vol.41 (Supplement_2) |
| issn | 0195-668X 1522-9645 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_ehjci_ehaa946_2456 |
| source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| title | Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T17%3A05%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Practice%20patterns,%20feasibility%20and%20efficacy%20of%20coronary%20artery%20angiography%20using%20distal%20radial%20approach&rft.jtitle=European%20heart%20journal&rft.au=Kajiya,%20T&rft.date=2020-11-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=Supplement_2&rft.issn=0195-668X&rft.eissn=1522-9645&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456&rft_dat=%3Coup_cross%3E10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456%3C/oup_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2456&rfr_iscdi=true |