Randomised comparison of femoral versus radial approach for percutaneous coronary intervention using abciximab in acute myocardial infarction: results of the FARMI Trial

Objective: To compare bleeding complications and results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between patients treated by radial and femoral approaches for acute myocardial infarction (AMI,) and using abciximab and 5 French guiding-catheters. Patients: 114 consecutive patients with AMI were prospectively randomised. Exclusion criteria were a history of coronary artery bypass graft, cardiogenic shock, atrioventricular block, and contraindication to abciximab or a negative Allen test. Local haemostasis was achieved by manual compression. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Peripheral arterial complication rates and delays to patient ambulation were significantly lower in the radial group than in the femoral group, whereas in-hospital stay was similar between the two groups. A cross over was more often necessary in the radial group than in the femoral group. Coronary angiography duration and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in the radial group than in the femoral group, whereas PCI duration was similar in both groups. Conclusions: The FARMI trial showed that the radial route lowered peripheral arterial complication rates and allowed earlier ambulation, despite no significant benefit on the duration of hospitalisation.

[1]  B. Strauss,et al.  Radial versus femoral access for emergent percutaneous coronary intervention with adjunct glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in acute myocardial infarction--the RADIAL-AMI pilot randomized trial. , 2005, American heart journal.

[2]  H. H. Veloso,et al.  Efficacy and safety of abciximab on acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. , 2004, American heart journal.

[3]  P. Garot,et al.  Comparison of transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and angioplasty in octogenarians (the OCTOPLUS study). , 2004, The American journal of cardiology.

[4]  C. Rogers,et al.  Comparison of the risk of vascular complications associated with femoral and radial access coronary catheterization procedures in obese versus nonobese patients. , 2004, The American journal of cardiology.

[5]  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.

[6]  M. Morice,et al.  Comparison of 5 French versus 6 French guiding catheters for transradial coronary intervention: a prospective, randomized study. , 2004, The Journal of invasive cardiology.

[7]  G. Montalescot,et al.  Recommendations on percutaneous coronary intervention for the reperfusion of acute ST elevation myocardial infarction. , 2004, Heart.

[8]  A. Dibié,et al.  Comparison of transradial vs. transfemoral approach in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction with primary angioplasty and abciximab , 2004, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[9]  D. Metz,et al.  Direct stent implantation without predilatation through 5 French guiding catheter following transfemoral coronary angiogram: A feasibility study , 2003, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[10]  J. J. Griffin,et al.  Benefits and Risks of Abciximab Use in Primary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction: The Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications (CADILLAC) Trial , 2003, Circulation.

[11]  P. Armstrong,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Tenecteplase in Combination With the Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Enoxaparin or Unfractionated Heparin in the Prehospital Setting: The Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimen (ASSENT)-3 PLUS Randomized Trial in Acute Myocardial Infarction , 2003, Circulation.

[12]  S. Saito,et al.  Comparative study on transradial approach vs. transfemoral approach in primary stent implantation for patients with acute myocardial infarction: Results of the test for myocardial infarction by prospective unicenter randomization for access sites (TEMPURA) trial , 2003, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[13]  A. Ziakas,et al.  Comparison of the radial and the femoral approaches in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. , 2003, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  R. Sabatier,et al.  Mini‐invasive strategy in acute coronary syndromes: Direct coronary stenting using 5 Fr guiding catheters and transradial approach , 2002, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[15]  G. Musumeci,et al.  Abciximab improves 6-month clinical outcome after rescue coronary angioplasty. , 2002, American heart journal.

[16]  W. Daniel,et al.  Transradial approach for coronary angioplasty in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: A dual‐center registry , 2002, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[17]  M. Morice,et al.  Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition with coronary stenting for acute myocardial infarction. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  H. Emanuelsson Stents, antithrombotic agents and vascular complications. Does site of arterial access make a difference? , 2000, European heart journal.

[19]  R. Choussat,et al.  Vascular complications and clinical outcome after coronary angioplasty with platelet IIb/IIIa receptor blockade. Comparison of transradial vs transfemoral arterial access. , 2000, European heart journal.

[20]  Bruce R. Brodie,et al.  Coronary Angioplasty with or without Stent Implantation for Acute Myocardial Infarction , 1999 .

[21]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Comparison of primary coronary angioplasty and intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review. , 1998, JAMA.

[22]  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.

[23]  M. Petch,et al.  Radial versus femoral approach for diagnostic coronary angiography in stable angina pectoris. , 1997, The American journal of cardiology.

[24]  D. Combs,et al.  Early hospital discharge after direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. , 1995, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[25]  F. Loop,et al.  Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Subcommittee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). , 1988, Circulation.

[26]  R. Mechmèche,et al.  [Transradial approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty]. , 2003, La Tunisie medicale.