Trends in the prevalence and outcomes of radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.

OBJECTIVES Our goal was to compare trends in the prevalence and outcomes of the radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in contemporary clinical practice. BACKGROUND There are few current data on the use and outcomes of the radial approach to PCI (r-PCI) in clinical practice. METHODS Data from 593,094 procedures in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (606 sites; 2004 to 2007) were analyzed to evaluate trends in use and outcomes of r-PCI. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the adjusted association between r-PCI and procedural success, bleeding complications, and vascular complications. Outcomes in elderly patients, women, and patients with acute coronary syndrome were specifically examined. RESULTS Although the proportion of r-PCI procedures has recently increased, it only accounts for 1.32% of total procedures (n = 7,804). Compared with the femoral approach, the use of r-PCI was associated with a similar rate of procedural success (adjusted odds ratio: 1.02 [95% confidence interval: 0.93 to 1.12]) but a significantly lower risk for bleeding complications (odds ratio: 0.42 [95% confidence interval: 0.31 to 0.56]) after multivariable adjustment. The reduction in bleeding complications was more pronounced among patients <75 years old, women, and patients undergoing PCI for acute coronary syndrome. CONCLUSIONS The use of r-PCI is rare in contemporary clinical practice, but it is associated with a rate of procedural success similar to the femoral approach and with lower rates of bleeding and vascular complications, even among high-risk groups. These results suggest that wider adoption of r-PCI in clinical practice may improve the safety of PCI.

[1]  K. Anstrom,et al.  Contemporary outcome trends in the elderly undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: results in 7,472 octogenarians. National Cardiovascular Network Collaboration. , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  X. Jouven,et al.  Prevention of arterial spasm during percutaneous coronary interventions through radial artery: The SPASM study , 2006, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

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

[4]  S. Zeger,et al.  Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models , 1986 .

[5]  B. Gersh,et al.  Twenty-Five–Year Trends in In-Hospital and Long-Term Outcome After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Single-Institution Experience , 2007, Circulation.

[6]  H V Anderson,et al.  The American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry™ (ACC-NCDR™): building a national clinical data repository , 2001 .

[7]  Salim Yusuf,et al.  Comparison of fondaparinux and enoxaparin in acute coronary syndromes. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  K. Alexander,et al.  Sex Differences in Major Bleeding With Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors: Results From the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) Initiative , 2006, Circulation.

[9]  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.

[10]  Adelaide,et al.  Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  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.

[12]  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.

[13]  M. Morice,et al.  Coronary angiography through the radial or the femoral approach: The CARAFE study , 2001, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[14]  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.

[15]  William S Weintraub,et al.  Development of a risk adjustment mortality model using the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR) experience: 1998-2000. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  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.

[17]  Tin-Kwang Lin,et al.  A Simple and Effective Regimen for Prevention of Radial Artery Spasm during Coronary Catheterization , 2005, Cardiology.

[18]  A. Jacobs,et al.  Access site hematoma requiring blood transfusion predicts mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Data from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry , 2007, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[19]  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.