Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study

Objective: We sought to demonstrate that the combination of a local vasodilator (verapamil), modern materials, patent hemostasis, and intravenous anticoagulant only in the case of percutaneous coronary intervention, as compared to default heparin administration after sheath insertion, may optimize a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cardiology 2018-01, Vol.140 (2), p.74-82
Hauptverfasser: Tebaldi, Matteo, Biscaglia, Simone, Tumscitz, Carlo, Del Franco, Annamaria, Gallo, Francesco, Spitaleri, Giosafat, Fileti, Luca, Serenelli, Matteo, Tonet, Elisabetta, Erriquez, Andrea, Campo, Gianluca, Ferrari, Roberto
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 82
container_issue 2
container_start_page 74
container_title Cardiology
container_volume 140
creator Tebaldi, Matteo
Biscaglia, Simone
Tumscitz, Carlo
Del Franco, Annamaria
Gallo, Francesco
Spitaleri, Giosafat
Fileti, Luca
Serenelli, Matteo
Tonet, Elisabetta
Erriquez, Andrea
Campo, Gianluca
Ferrari, Roberto
description Objective: We sought to demonstrate that the combination of a local vasodilator (verapamil), modern materials, patent hemostasis, and intravenous anticoagulant only in the case of percutaneous coronary intervention, as compared to default heparin administration after sheath insertion, may optimize a combined endpoint, including radial artery oc­clusion (RAO), radial artery spasm (RAS), and access site complication. Methods: This is a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized trial. Overall, 418 patients undergoing a transradial approach (TRA) for coronary procedures were randomized 1: 1 to receive intraradial verapamil (5 mg) or heparin (5,000 IU) after a 6-Fr sheath insertion. The primary outcome was the 24-h occurrence of RAO (ultrasound confirmation), access site complication, and RAS requiring the bailout administration of vasodilators. Results: The combined primary outcome occurred in 127 (30%) patients. It was significantly lower in patients randomized to verapamil as compared to others (26 vs. 35%, p = 0.03). This was mainly due to a significant reduction in RAS (3 vs. 10%, p = 0.006). The 24-h and 30-day occurrence of RAO did not differ between the study groups. Conclusion: Local administration of verapamil versus heparin reduces RAS, without increasing RAO, which appears to be strictly related to radial artery diameter and hemostasis time.
doi_str_mv 10.1159/000488852
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1159_000488852</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2055614108</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-7aa7f88f6e8518cd457942833742337694da80d0f7a81fd8803571072021cd283</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0E1LxDAQBuAgirt-HLyLBLzooZqk6Sb1ttSPFVYUrXstsZlotW1q0gr-e1uqe_KSkJknA_MidEDJGaVRfE4I4VLKiG2gKeWMBrGI6Caa9nUZzELKJmjH-_eBCc620YTFMpY8FFPUJrZqlCu8rbE1eAVONaoqSvwFznceL2Do1lh5PNfvXZ23xRfg1IFqK6hbbKzrX6r2TulClTixztbKfeMHZ3PQnQN_gdM3wKurx7vnFD-1nf7eQ1tGlR72f-9d9Hx9lSaLYHl_c5vMl0EehrwNhFLCSGlmICMqc80jEXMmw7Bfoj9mMddKEk2MUJIaLSUJI0GJYITRXPdwF52McxtnPzvwbVYVPoeyVDXYzmeMRNGMckoGejrS3FnvHZiscUXVL5JRkg0hZ-uQe3v0O7Z7qUCv5V-qPTgcwYdyr-DWYP3_-N928ng5iqzRJvwBOKiLCw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2055614108</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Karger Journals</source><creator>Tebaldi, Matteo ; Biscaglia, Simone ; Tumscitz, Carlo ; Del Franco, Annamaria ; Gallo, Francesco ; Spitaleri, Giosafat ; Fileti, Luca ; Serenelli, Matteo ; Tonet, Elisabetta ; Erriquez, Andrea ; Campo, Gianluca ; Ferrari, Roberto</creator><creatorcontrib>Tebaldi, Matteo ; Biscaglia, Simone ; Tumscitz, Carlo ; Del Franco, Annamaria ; Gallo, Francesco ; Spitaleri, Giosafat ; Fileti, Luca ; Serenelli, Matteo ; Tonet, Elisabetta ; Erriquez, Andrea ; Campo, Gianluca ; Ferrari, Roberto</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: We sought to demonstrate that the combination of a local vasodilator (verapamil), modern materials, patent hemostasis, and intravenous anticoagulant only in the case of percutaneous coronary intervention, as compared to default heparin administration after sheath insertion, may optimize a combined endpoint, including radial artery oc­clusion (RAO), radial artery spasm (RAS), and access site complication. Methods: This is a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized trial. Overall, 418 patients undergoing a transradial approach (TRA) for coronary procedures were randomized 1: 1 to receive intraradial verapamil (5 mg) or heparin (5,000 IU) after a 6-Fr sheath insertion. The primary outcome was the 24-h occurrence of RAO (ultrasound confirmation), access site complication, and RAS requiring the bailout administration of vasodilators. Results: The combined primary outcome occurred in 127 (30%) patients. It was significantly lower in patients randomized to verapamil as compared to others (26 vs. 35%, p = 0.03). This was mainly due to a significant reduction in RAS (3 vs. 10%, p = 0.006). The 24-h and 30-day occurrence of RAO did not differ between the study groups. Conclusion: Local administration of verapamil versus heparin reduces RAS, without increasing RAO, which appears to be strictly related to radial artery diameter and hemostasis time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-6312</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1421-9751</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1159/000488852</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29898437</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel, Switzerland</publisher><subject>Aged ; Anticoagulants - therapeutic use ; Cardiac Catheterization - adverse effects ; Cardiac Catheterization - methods ; Double-Blind Method ; Female ; Heparin - therapeutic use ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Original Research ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - adverse effects ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods ; Peripheral Arterial Disease - prevention &amp; control ; Radial Artery - drug effects ; Treatment Outcome ; Vasodilator Agents - therapeutic use ; Verapamil - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>Cardiology, 2018-01, Vol.140 (2), p.74-82</ispartof><rights>2018 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><rights>2018 S. Karger AG, Basel.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-7aa7f88f6e8518cd457942833742337694da80d0f7a81fd8803571072021cd283</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-7aa7f88f6e8518cd457942833742337694da80d0f7a81fd8803571072021cd283</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2805-8090</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,2430,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29898437$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tebaldi, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Biscaglia, Simone</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tumscitz, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Franco, Annamaria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallo, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spitaleri, Giosafat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fileti, Luca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Serenelli, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tonet, Elisabetta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erriquez, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campo, Gianluca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferrari, Roberto</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study</title><title>Cardiology</title><addtitle>Cardiology</addtitle><description>Objective: We sought to demonstrate that the combination of a local vasodilator (verapamil), modern materials, patent hemostasis, and intravenous anticoagulant only in the case of percutaneous coronary intervention, as compared to default heparin administration after sheath insertion, may optimize a combined endpoint, including radial artery oc­clusion (RAO), radial artery spasm (RAS), and access site complication. Methods: This is a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized trial. Overall, 418 patients undergoing a transradial approach (TRA) for coronary procedures were randomized 1: 1 to receive intraradial verapamil (5 mg) or heparin (5,000 IU) after a 6-Fr sheath insertion. The primary outcome was the 24-h occurrence of RAO (ultrasound confirmation), access site complication, and RAS requiring the bailout administration of vasodilators. Results: The combined primary outcome occurred in 127 (30%) patients. It was significantly lower in patients randomized to verapamil as compared to others (26 vs. 35%, p = 0.03). This was mainly due to a significant reduction in RAS (3 vs. 10%, p = 0.006). The 24-h and 30-day occurrence of RAO did not differ between the study groups. Conclusion: Local administration of verapamil versus heparin reduces RAS, without increasing RAO, which appears to be strictly related to radial artery diameter and hemostasis time.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anticoagulants - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Cardiac Catheterization - adverse effects</subject><subject>Cardiac Catheterization - methods</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heparin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - adverse effects</subject><subject>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods</subject><subject>Peripheral Arterial Disease - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Radial Artery - drug effects</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Vasodilator Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Verapamil - therapeutic use</subject><issn>0008-6312</issn><issn>1421-9751</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpt0E1LxDAQBuAgirt-HLyLBLzooZqk6Sb1ttSPFVYUrXstsZlotW1q0gr-e1uqe_KSkJknA_MidEDJGaVRfE4I4VLKiG2gKeWMBrGI6Caa9nUZzELKJmjH-_eBCc620YTFMpY8FFPUJrZqlCu8rbE1eAVONaoqSvwFznceL2Do1lh5PNfvXZ23xRfg1IFqK6hbbKzrX6r2TulClTixztbKfeMHZ3PQnQN_gdM3wKurx7vnFD-1nf7eQ1tGlR72f-9d9Hx9lSaLYHl_c5vMl0EehrwNhFLCSGlmICMqc80jEXMmw7Bfoj9mMddKEk2MUJIaLSUJI0GJYITRXPdwF52McxtnPzvwbVYVPoeyVDXYzmeMRNGMckoGejrS3FnvHZiscUXVL5JRkg0hZ-uQe3v0O7Z7qUCv5V-qPTgcwYdyr-DWYP3_-N928ng5iqzRJvwBOKiLCw</recordid><startdate>20180101</startdate><enddate>20180101</enddate><creator>Tebaldi, Matteo</creator><creator>Biscaglia, Simone</creator><creator>Tumscitz, Carlo</creator><creator>Del Franco, Annamaria</creator><creator>Gallo, Francesco</creator><creator>Spitaleri, Giosafat</creator><creator>Fileti, Luca</creator><creator>Serenelli, Matteo</creator><creator>Tonet, Elisabetta</creator><creator>Erriquez, Andrea</creator><creator>Campo, Gianluca</creator><creator>Ferrari, Roberto</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2805-8090</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180101</creationdate><title>Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study</title><author>Tebaldi, Matteo ; Biscaglia, Simone ; Tumscitz, Carlo ; Del Franco, Annamaria ; Gallo, Francesco ; Spitaleri, Giosafat ; Fileti, Luca ; Serenelli, Matteo ; Tonet, Elisabetta ; Erriquez, Andrea ; Campo, Gianluca ; Ferrari, Roberto</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-7aa7f88f6e8518cd457942833742337694da80d0f7a81fd8803571072021cd283</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anticoagulants - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Cardiac Catheterization - adverse effects</topic><topic>Cardiac Catheterization - methods</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heparin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - adverse effects</topic><topic>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods</topic><topic>Peripheral Arterial Disease - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Radial Artery - drug effects</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Vasodilator Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Verapamil - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tebaldi, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Biscaglia, Simone</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tumscitz, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Franco, Annamaria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallo, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spitaleri, Giosafat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fileti, Luca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Serenelli, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tonet, Elisabetta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erriquez, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campo, Gianluca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferrari, Roberto</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cardiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tebaldi, Matteo</au><au>Biscaglia, Simone</au><au>Tumscitz, Carlo</au><au>Del Franco, Annamaria</au><au>Gallo, Francesco</au><au>Spitaleri, Giosafat</au><au>Fileti, Luca</au><au>Serenelli, Matteo</au><au>Tonet, Elisabetta</au><au>Erriquez, Andrea</au><au>Campo, Gianluca</au><au>Ferrari, Roberto</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study</atitle><jtitle>Cardiology</jtitle><addtitle>Cardiology</addtitle><date>2018-01-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>140</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>74</spage><epage>82</epage><pages>74-82</pages><issn>0008-6312</issn><eissn>1421-9751</eissn><abstract>Objective: We sought to demonstrate that the combination of a local vasodilator (verapamil), modern materials, patent hemostasis, and intravenous anticoagulant only in the case of percutaneous coronary intervention, as compared to default heparin administration after sheath insertion, may optimize a combined endpoint, including radial artery oc­clusion (RAO), radial artery spasm (RAS), and access site complication. Methods: This is a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized trial. Overall, 418 patients undergoing a transradial approach (TRA) for coronary procedures were randomized 1: 1 to receive intraradial verapamil (5 mg) or heparin (5,000 IU) after a 6-Fr sheath insertion. The primary outcome was the 24-h occurrence of RAO (ultrasound confirmation), access site complication, and RAS requiring the bailout administration of vasodilators. Results: The combined primary outcome occurred in 127 (30%) patients. It was significantly lower in patients randomized to verapamil as compared to others (26 vs. 35%, p = 0.03). This was mainly due to a significant reduction in RAS (3 vs. 10%, p = 0.006). The 24-h and 30-day occurrence of RAO did not differ between the study groups. Conclusion: Local administration of verapamil versus heparin reduces RAS, without increasing RAO, which appears to be strictly related to radial artery diameter and hemostasis time.</abstract><cop>Basel, Switzerland</cop><pmid>29898437</pmid><doi>10.1159/000488852</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2805-8090</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0008-6312
ispartof Cardiology, 2018-01, Vol.140 (2), p.74-82
issn 0008-6312
1421-9751
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1159_000488852
source MEDLINE; Karger Journals
subjects Aged
Anticoagulants - therapeutic use
Cardiac Catheterization - adverse effects
Cardiac Catheterization - methods
Double-Blind Method
Female
Heparin - therapeutic use
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Original Research
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - adverse effects
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods
Peripheral Arterial Disease - prevention & control
Radial Artery - drug effects
Treatment Outcome
Vasodilator Agents - therapeutic use
Verapamil - therapeutic use
title Comparison of Verapamil versus Heparin as Adjunctive Treatment for Transradial Coronary Procedures: The VERMUT Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-11T21%3A15%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Verapamil%20versus%20Heparin%20as%20Adjunctive%20Treatment%20for%20Transradial%20Coronary%20Procedures:%20The%20VERMUT%20Study&rft.jtitle=Cardiology&rft.au=Tebaldi,%20Matteo&rft.date=2018-01-01&rft.volume=140&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=74&rft.epage=82&rft.pages=74-82&rft.issn=0008-6312&rft.eissn=1421-9751&rft_id=info:doi/10.1159/000488852&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2055614108%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2055614108&rft_id=info:pmid/29898437&rfr_iscdi=true