Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Bypass Grafts
We sought to compare the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts in terms of volume of radiographic contrast administered during cardiac catheterization, fluoroscopy time, and total procedure time....
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Cardiovascular revascularization medicine 2020-01, Vol.21 (1), p.2-5 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 5 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 2 |
| container_title | Cardiovascular revascularization medicine |
| container_volume | 21 |
| creator | Hirzallah, Hisham Amro, Ahmed Kusmic, Damir Curtis, Zachary Leigh, Emilia C. Numan, Yazan Parsons, Julia Amro, Mohammad Akpanudo, Sutoidem Sayyed, Rameez Elhamdani, Mehiar |
| description | We sought to compare the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts in terms of volume of radiographic contrast administered during cardiac catheterization, fluoroscopy time, and total procedure time.
The transradial access has been increasingly used as an alternative to transfemoral. Several studies demonstrated that such access is associated with lower rates of vascular and bleeding complications. Although coronary artery bypass graft patients comprise a significant portion of the coronary artery disease population, this subpopulation was often excluded or underrepresented in transradial access studies.
Single center, retrospective cohort study. In the study period, all patients who had previously undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery and had received cardiac catheterization at our institution were included in the study population.
A total of 2153 patients were included in the study. From these, 1937 were performed by femoral artery and 216 by transradial approach. Compared to the transfemoral approach, transradial access was associated with lower contrast use (136.3 ± 74.4 ml vs. 122.8 ± 59.1 ml, p = 0.035) and longer fluoroscopy time (13.9 ± 25.6 min vs. 15.9 ± 14.3 min, p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.carrev.2019.03.002 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2194134076</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1553838919301642</els_id><sourcerecordid>2194134076</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-c41460174f807aa875890610987e9f7bae2005f321201c1c4e7788999fc4a8b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UU2P0zAQjRCI_YB_gJCPXBLGcRLbF6RSwe5KK7GH3i3XGW9dNXEYp0X9H_xgvGSBGyd7Ru_Nm3mvKN5xqDjw7uO-cpYIT1UNXFcgKoD6RXHJlVQlaKFe5n_bilIJpS-Kq5T2AELWnXxdXAhQqm20vix-ruMwWQopjix6tiE7JrJ9sAdmx36pPQ6RcmM1TRSt22FiPhJbR4qjpTNbjY8hPpKdduffpAckd5ztiPGY2N04I51wnENWCCN7sHPIVWI_wrz7N-PzebIpsRuyfk5vilfeHhK-fX6vi83XL5v1bXn_7eZuvbovnejquXQNbzrgsvEKpLVKtkpDx0EridrLrcUaoPWi5tkix12DUiqltfausWorrosPy9h81vcjptkMITk8HJbVTc11w0UDssvQZoE6iikRejNRGPLihoN5isPszRKHeYrDgDA5jkx7_6xw3A7Y_yX98T8DPi0AzGeeApJJLtvjsA-EbjZ9DP9X-AVdnqAt</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2194134076</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Bypass Grafts</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Hirzallah, Hisham ; Amro, Ahmed ; Kusmic, Damir ; Curtis, Zachary ; Leigh, Emilia C. ; Numan, Yazan ; Parsons, Julia ; Amro, Mohammad ; Akpanudo, Sutoidem ; Sayyed, Rameez ; Elhamdani, Mehiar</creator><creatorcontrib>Hirzallah, Hisham ; Amro, Ahmed ; Kusmic, Damir ; Curtis, Zachary ; Leigh, Emilia C. ; Numan, Yazan ; Parsons, Julia ; Amro, Mohammad ; Akpanudo, Sutoidem ; Sayyed, Rameez ; Elhamdani, Mehiar</creatorcontrib><description>We sought to compare the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts in terms of volume of radiographic contrast administered during cardiac catheterization, fluoroscopy time, and total procedure time.
The transradial access has been increasingly used as an alternative to transfemoral. Several studies demonstrated that such access is associated with lower rates of vascular and bleeding complications. Although coronary artery bypass graft patients comprise a significant portion of the coronary artery disease population, this subpopulation was often excluded or underrepresented in transradial access studies.
Single center, retrospective cohort study. In the study period, all patients who had previously undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery and had received cardiac catheterization at our institution were included in the study population.
A total of 2153 patients were included in the study. From these, 1937 were performed by femoral artery and 216 by transradial approach. Compared to the transfemoral approach, transradial access was associated with lower contrast use (136.3 ± 74.4 ml vs. 122.8 ± 59.1 ml, p = 0.035) and longer fluoroscopy time (13.9 ± 25.6 min vs. 15.9 ± 14.3 min, p < 0.001).
Diagnostic and interventional catheterization through the transradial approach in patients with previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery was associated with less contrast amount used and longer fluoroscopy time compared to the transfemoral approach. The transradial approach was also associated with lower crossover rates and less vascular complications.
•Transradial access for coronary interventions in CABG may be more beneficial for patients than transfemoral access.•Reduction in amount of contrast used in transradial approach without any difference in the duration of procedures was demonstrated in this study</description><identifier>ISSN: 1553-8389</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-0938</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2019.03.002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30885499</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>CABG ; Catheterization ; Femoral ; PCI ; Radial</subject><ispartof>Cardiovascular revascularization medicine, 2020-01, Vol.21 (1), p.2-5</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-c41460174f807aa875890610987e9f7bae2005f321201c1c4e7788999fc4a8b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-c41460174f807aa875890610987e9f7bae2005f321201c1c4e7788999fc4a8b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2019.03.002$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30885499$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hirzallah, Hisham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amro, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kusmic, Damir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Curtis, Zachary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leigh, Emilia C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Numan, Yazan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parsons, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amro, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akpanudo, Sutoidem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sayyed, Rameez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elhamdani, Mehiar</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Bypass Grafts</title><title>Cardiovascular revascularization medicine</title><addtitle>Cardiovasc Revasc Med</addtitle><description>We sought to compare the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts in terms of volume of radiographic contrast administered during cardiac catheterization, fluoroscopy time, and total procedure time.
The transradial access has been increasingly used as an alternative to transfemoral. Several studies demonstrated that such access is associated with lower rates of vascular and bleeding complications. Although coronary artery bypass graft patients comprise a significant portion of the coronary artery disease population, this subpopulation was often excluded or underrepresented in transradial access studies.
Single center, retrospective cohort study. In the study period, all patients who had previously undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery and had received cardiac catheterization at our institution were included in the study population.
A total of 2153 patients were included in the study. From these, 1937 were performed by femoral artery and 216 by transradial approach. Compared to the transfemoral approach, transradial access was associated with lower contrast use (136.3 ± 74.4 ml vs. 122.8 ± 59.1 ml, p = 0.035) and longer fluoroscopy time (13.9 ± 25.6 min vs. 15.9 ± 14.3 min, p < 0.001).
Diagnostic and interventional catheterization through the transradial approach in patients with previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery was associated with less contrast amount used and longer fluoroscopy time compared to the transfemoral approach. The transradial approach was also associated with lower crossover rates and less vascular complications.
•Transradial access for coronary interventions in CABG may be more beneficial for patients than transfemoral access.•Reduction in amount of contrast used in transradial approach without any difference in the duration of procedures was demonstrated in this study</description><subject>CABG</subject><subject>Catheterization</subject><subject>Femoral</subject><subject>PCI</subject><subject>Radial</subject><issn>1553-8389</issn><issn>1878-0938</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UU2P0zAQjRCI_YB_gJCPXBLGcRLbF6RSwe5KK7GH3i3XGW9dNXEYp0X9H_xgvGSBGyd7Ru_Nm3mvKN5xqDjw7uO-cpYIT1UNXFcgKoD6RXHJlVQlaKFe5n_bilIJpS-Kq5T2AELWnXxdXAhQqm20vix-ruMwWQopjix6tiE7JrJ9sAdmx36pPQ6RcmM1TRSt22FiPhJbR4qjpTNbjY8hPpKdduffpAckd5ztiPGY2N04I51wnENWCCN7sHPIVWI_wrz7N-PzebIpsRuyfk5vilfeHhK-fX6vi83XL5v1bXn_7eZuvbovnejquXQNbzrgsvEKpLVKtkpDx0EridrLrcUaoPWi5tkix12DUiqltfausWorrosPy9h81vcjptkMITk8HJbVTc11w0UDssvQZoE6iikRejNRGPLihoN5isPszRKHeYrDgDA5jkx7_6xw3A7Y_yX98T8DPi0AzGeeApJJLtvjsA-EbjZ9DP9X-AVdnqAt</recordid><startdate>202001</startdate><enddate>202001</enddate><creator>Hirzallah, Hisham</creator><creator>Amro, Ahmed</creator><creator>Kusmic, Damir</creator><creator>Curtis, Zachary</creator><creator>Leigh, Emilia C.</creator><creator>Numan, Yazan</creator><creator>Parsons, Julia</creator><creator>Amro, Mohammad</creator><creator>Akpanudo, Sutoidem</creator><creator>Sayyed, Rameez</creator><creator>Elhamdani, Mehiar</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202001</creationdate><title>Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Bypass Grafts</title><author>Hirzallah, Hisham ; Amro, Ahmed ; Kusmic, Damir ; Curtis, Zachary ; Leigh, Emilia C. ; Numan, Yazan ; Parsons, Julia ; Amro, Mohammad ; Akpanudo, Sutoidem ; Sayyed, Rameez ; Elhamdani, Mehiar</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-c41460174f807aa875890610987e9f7bae2005f321201c1c4e7788999fc4a8b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>CABG</topic><topic>Catheterization</topic><topic>Femoral</topic><topic>PCI</topic><topic>Radial</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hirzallah, Hisham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amro, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kusmic, Damir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Curtis, Zachary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leigh, Emilia C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Numan, Yazan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parsons, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amro, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akpanudo, Sutoidem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sayyed, Rameez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elhamdani, Mehiar</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cardiovascular revascularization medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hirzallah, Hisham</au><au>Amro, Ahmed</au><au>Kusmic, Damir</au><au>Curtis, Zachary</au><au>Leigh, Emilia C.</au><au>Numan, Yazan</au><au>Parsons, Julia</au><au>Amro, Mohammad</au><au>Akpanudo, Sutoidem</au><au>Sayyed, Rameez</au><au>Elhamdani, Mehiar</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Bypass Grafts</atitle><jtitle>Cardiovascular revascularization medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Cardiovasc Revasc Med</addtitle><date>2020-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>2</spage><epage>5</epage><pages>2-5</pages><issn>1553-8389</issn><eissn>1878-0938</eissn><abstract>We sought to compare the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts in terms of volume of radiographic contrast administered during cardiac catheterization, fluoroscopy time, and total procedure time.
The transradial access has been increasingly used as an alternative to transfemoral. Several studies demonstrated that such access is associated with lower rates of vascular and bleeding complications. Although coronary artery bypass graft patients comprise a significant portion of the coronary artery disease population, this subpopulation was often excluded or underrepresented in transradial access studies.
Single center, retrospective cohort study. In the study period, all patients who had previously undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery and had received cardiac catheterization at our institution were included in the study population.
A total of 2153 patients were included in the study. From these, 1937 were performed by femoral artery and 216 by transradial approach. Compared to the transfemoral approach, transradial access was associated with lower contrast use (136.3 ± 74.4 ml vs. 122.8 ± 59.1 ml, p = 0.035) and longer fluoroscopy time (13.9 ± 25.6 min vs. 15.9 ± 14.3 min, p < 0.001).
Diagnostic and interventional catheterization through the transradial approach in patients with previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery was associated with less contrast amount used and longer fluoroscopy time compared to the transfemoral approach. The transradial approach was also associated with lower crossover rates and less vascular complications.
•Transradial access for coronary interventions in CABG may be more beneficial for patients than transfemoral access.•Reduction in amount of contrast used in transradial approach without any difference in the duration of procedures was demonstrated in this study</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>30885499</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.carrev.2019.03.002</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1553-8389 |
| ispartof | Cardiovascular revascularization medicine, 2020-01, Vol.21 (1), p.2-5 |
| issn | 1553-8389 1878-0938 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2194134076 |
| source | Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
| subjects | CABG Catheterization Femoral PCI Radial |
| title | Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Bypass Grafts |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T20%3A14%3A43IST&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%20Transradial%20and%20Transfemoral%20Approaches%20for%20Coronary%20Angiography%20and%20Percutaneous%20Intervention%20in%20Patients%20with%20Coronary%20Bypass%20Grafts&rft.jtitle=Cardiovascular%20revascularization%20medicine&rft.au=Hirzallah,%20Hisham&rft.date=2020-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=2&rft.epage=5&rft.pages=2-5&rft.issn=1553-8389&rft.eissn=1878-0938&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.carrev.2019.03.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2194134076%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=2194134076&rft_id=info:pmid/30885499&rft_els_id=S1553838919301642&rfr_iscdi=true |