Adoption of the transradial approach for percutaneous coronary intervention and rates of vascular complications following transfemoral procedures: Insights from NCDR

This study was designed to examine the association between adopting the transradial approach for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and rates of vascular complications following transfemoral PCI.

[1]  M. Fornage,et al.  Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association , 2017, Circulation.

[2]  N. Curzen,et al.  Increased Radial Access Is Not Associated With Worse Femoral Outcomes for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United Kingdom , 2017, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[3]  H. Ly,et al.  The Benefits Conferred by Radial Access for Cardiac Catheterization Are Offset by a Paradoxical Increase in the Rate of Vascular Access Site Complications With Femoral Access: The Campeau Radial Paradox. , 2015, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[4]  Sunil V. Rao,et al.  Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[5]  T. Kinnaird,et al.  Patients undergoing PCI from the femoral route by default radial operators are at high risk of vascular access-site complications. , 2014, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[6]  V. Falk,et al.  The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Developedwiththespecial contribution of theEuropeanAssociationof Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) , 2014 .

[7]  J. Dery,et al.  Risk score, causes, and clinical impact of failure of transradial approach for percutaneous coronary interventions. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[8]  Laura Mauri,et al.  2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention , 2013, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[9]  John C. Messenger,et al.  Adoption of Radial Access and Comparison of Outcomes to Femoral Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Updated Report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (2007–2012) , 2013, Circulation.

[10]  Jane A. Linderbaum,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  E. Romagnoli,et al.  Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) study. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  J. Messenger,et al.  A contemporary view of diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: a report from the CathPCI Registry of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2010 through June 2011. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[13]  Bruce Y. Lee,et al.  Systematic Review and Cost–Benefit Analysis of Radial Artery Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention , 2012, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[14]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  ESC / EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization , 2014 .

[15]  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.

[16]  Sunil V. Rao,et al.  The transradial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention: historical perspective, current concepts, and future directions. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  P. Dehghani,et al.  Mechanism and predictors of failed transradial approach for percutaneous coronary interventions. , 2009, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[18]  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.

[19]  G. Biondi-Zoccai,et al.  Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[20]  J. J. Griffin,et al.  A Prospective, Randomized Evaluation of Prophylactic Intraaortic Balloon Counterpulsation in High Risk Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Treated With Primary Angioplasty fn1fn1Funding for this study was provided in part by unrestricted grants from Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Santa , 1997 .

[21]  J. J. Griffin,et al.  A prospective, randomized evaluation of prophylactic intraaortic balloon counterpulsation in high risk patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty. Second Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI-II) Trial Investigators. , 1997, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.