Effectiveness and Safety of Left Distal Transradial Access in Coronary Procedures in the Caribbean

This retrospective study investigated the effectiveness and safety of left distal transradial access (LDTRA) in patients with cardiovascular disease in Trinidad undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Procedural parameters, including technical success and s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2024-02, Vol.16 (2), p.e54601-e54601
Hauptverfasser: Seecheran, Naveen A, Leyva Quert, Abel Y, Seecheran, Valmiki K, Seecheran, Rajeev V, Katwaroo, Arun, Jagdeo, Cathy-Lee, Rafeeq, Salma, Ramcharan, Priya, Peram, Lakshmipathi, Ramlal, Ravi, Ramlackhansingh, Anil, Giddings, Stanley, Sandy, Sherry
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This retrospective study investigated the effectiveness and safety of left distal transradial access (LDTRA) in patients with cardiovascular disease in Trinidad undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Procedural parameters, including technical success and safety outcomes such as vascular complications and radial artery occlusion (RAO), were assessed in 111 consecutive patients undergoing CAG or PCI from January 2023 to June 2023 at the Eric Williams Medical Sciences Complex, Trinidad and Tobago. Eighty-eight patients underwent LDTRA, while 23 received left transradial access (LTRA). There was no difference in procedural success with LDTRA compared to LTRA, 90.9% vs. 100%, -value 0.202, non-significant (ns). LDTRA was associated with shorter fluoroscopy times (8.4 ± 6.8 minutes vs. 12.4 ± 7.7 minutes, -value = 0.02), procedural duration (26.7 ± 18 minutes vs. 35.8 ± 20 minutes, -value = 0.04), and hemostasis time (142 ± 41 minutes vs. 186 ± 44 minutes, -value < 0.05). There were no significant differences in procedural-related complications (8% for LDTRA vs. 4.3% for LTRA, -value = 0.476, ns). There were no reported cases of RAO. In the subgroup of patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the fluoroscopy and procedure times were similar for both access sites; however, LDTRA was associated with a shorter hemostasis time (128 ± 30 minutes vs. 194 ± 39 minutes, -value = 0.01). LDTRA is effective and safe for coronary procedures and is associated with a shorter hemostasis time. This study may prove clinically pertinent in a limited-resource Caribbean setting.
ISSN:2168-8184
2168-8184
DOI:10.7759/cureus.54601