PURPOSE: To evaluate axillary artery access for the interventional treatment of carotid or splanchnic arteries that have angulated takeoff or complex anatomy when larger catheters (up to 9 F) are needed. TECHNIQUE: The axillary artery approach was used to treat the left internal carotid artery (ICA) in 3 patients (2 angulated takeoffs and 1 bovine arch) and a celiac axis aneurysm. An 8-F, 45-cm-long introducer sheath was inserted for the carotid procedures, whereas a 9-F, 90-cm sheath was chosen for the celiac aneurysm. Cerebral protection and stenting were successfully performed in all carotid patients; an 8x40-mm stent-graft was implanted to exclude the celiac artery aneurysm. An 8-F vascular closure device was used in the axillary arteries; hemostasis was immediate, and no hematoma or other complications were recorded in follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary experience revisits the axillary approach as an alternative access route for interventional procedures. In association with a vascular closure device, this approach should be considered as a useful and safe option for those interventional procedures in which larger sheaths or catheters are required to cope with difficult arterial anatomies.
PURPOSE: To evaluate axillary artery access for the interventional treatment of carotid or splanchnic arteries that have angulated takeoff or complex anatomy when larger catheters (up to 9 F) are needed. TECHNIQUE: The axillary artery approach was used to treat the left internal carotid artery (ICA) in 3 patients (2 angulated takeoffs and 1 bovine arch) and a celiac axis aneurysm. An 8-F, 45-cm-long introducer sheath was inserted for the carotid procedures, whereas a 9-F, 90-cm sheath was chosen for the celiac aneurysm. Cerebral protection and stenting were successfully performed in all carotid patients; an 8x40-mm stent-graft was implanted to exclude the celiac artery aneurysm. An 8-F vascular closure device was used in the axillary arteries; hemostasis was immediate, and no hematoma or other complications were recorded in follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary experience revisits the axillary approach as an alternative access route for interventional procedures. In association with a vascular closure device, this approach should be considered as a useful and safe option for those interventional procedures in which larger sheaths or catheters are required to cope with difficult arterial anatomies.