Characterization of Operator Learning Curve for Transradial Coronary Interventions

Background—Transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TR-PCI) improves clinical outcomes compared to the transfemoral (TF) approach. However, inadequate training and experience has limited widespread adoption by interventional cardiologists. Methods and Results—Clinical and procedural characteristics for TR-PCI were prospectively collected from 1999 to 2008. To identify minimum case volume for optimum clinical benefit, single-vessel TR-PCI cases were chronologically ranked and stratified into 1 to 50, 51 to 100, 101 to 150 and 151 to 300 case volume groups for operators starting the TR approach at the study institution. Cases by operators with a >300 TR-PCI case volume comprised the control group. TR-PCI failure rates, contrast use, guide usage, and fluoroscopy time were compared among groups. A total of 1672 patients underwent TR-PCI by 28 operators. TR-PCI failure occurred in 4% and was higher in the 1 to 50 case volume group compared to the 51 to 100 (P=0.007) and control (P=0.01) groups. Contrast use was greater in the 1 to 50 group (180±79 mL) compared to the 151 to 300 (157±75 mL, P=0.02) and control (168±79 mL, P=0.05) groups. Fluoroscopy time was higher in the 1 to 50 group (15±10 minutes) compared to the 101 to 150 (13±10 minutes, P=0.04) and control (12±9 minutes, P=0.02) groups. Reasons for TR-PCI failure included spasm (38%), subclavian tortuousity (16%), poor guide support (16%), failed access (10%), and radial loop (7%). Case volume was significantly correlated with TR-PCI failure (&bgr;=−0.0076, P=0.0028), and odds of failure was reduced by 32% for each 50 increments in case volume. Conclusions—TR-PCI success depends on operator experience, and a case volume of ≥50 cases is required to achieve outcomes comparable to experienced operators. These findings have implications both for PCI operators looking to expand their skills and for defining standards for training.

[1]  S. Jolly,et al.  Bleeding Complications in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: Are They Important and How Can We Prevent Them? , 2012, Hospital practice.

[2]  Sunil V. Rao,et al.  Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial , 2011, The Lancet.

[3]  D. Holmes,et al.  Bleeding, blood transfusion, and increased mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: implications for contemporary practice. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  E. Vicaut,et al.  Predictors of outcome in patients undergoing PCI. Results of the RIVIERA study. , 2008, International journal of cardiology.

[5]  Fang-Shu Ou,et al.  Trends in the prevalence and outcomes of radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. , 2008, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[6]  B. Gersh,et al.  Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  R. Jaffe,et al.  Comparison of radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary interventions in octogenarians , 2007, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[8]  H. White,et al.  Impact of major bleeding on 30-day mortality and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY Trial. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  R. Califf,et al.  Bleeding complications in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing early invasive management can be reduced with radial access, smaller sheath sizes, and timely sheath removal , 2007, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[10]  P. Poirier,et al.  A Randomized Study Comparing Same-Day Home Discharge and Abciximab Bolus Only to Overnight Hospitalization and Abciximab Bolus and Infusion After Transradial Coronary Stent Implantation , 2006, Circulation.

[11]  D. Roberts,et al.  Day case transradial coronary angioplasty: A four‐year single‐center experience , 2006, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[12]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Adverse Impact of Bleeding on Prognosis in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes , 2006, Circulation.

[13]  G. Laarman,et al.  Outpatient coronary angioplasty: Feasible and safe , 2005, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[14]  D. Patel,et al.  Radial versus femoral access for rescue percutaneous coronary intervention with adjuvant glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use. , 2004, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[15]  N. Weissman,et al.  Incidence, predictors, and prognostic implications of bleeding and blood transfusion following percutaneous coronary interventions. , 2003, The American journal of cardiology.

[16]  J. Rodríguez,et al.  Coronariografía y angioplastia coronaria por vía radial: experiencia inicial y curva de aprendizaje , 2003 .

[17]  S. Takeshita,et al.  Efficacy of transradial primary stenting in patients with acute myocardial infarction. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[18]  J. Schneider,et al.  Stenting in acute coronary syndromes: a comparison of radial versus femoral access sites. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  S. Goldberg,et al.  Learning curve in the use of the radial artery as vascular access in the performance of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1998, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[20]  Y. Louvard,et al.  [Coronary angiography by a radial artery approach: feasibility, learning curve. One operator's experience]. , 1998, Archives des maladies du coeur et des vaisseaux.

[21]  G. Laarman,et al.  A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: the access study. , 1997, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  C. Spaulding,et al.  Left radial approach for coronary angiography: results of a prospective study. , 1996, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[23]  J. Hofland,et al.  Cost comparison between two modes of Palmaz Schatz coronary stent implantation: transradial bare stent technique vs. transfemoral sheath-protected stent technique. , 1995, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[24]  G. Laarman,et al.  Percutaneous transradial artery approach for coronary stent implantation. , 1993, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[25]  Salim Yusuf,et al.  Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. , 2009, American heart journal.

[26]  A. Castro Beiras,et al.  [Transradial approach to coronary angiography and angioplasty: initial experience and learning curve]. , 2003, Revista espanola de cardiologia.