Literature DB >> 17295080

Access to the superficial femoral artery in the presence of a "hostile groin": a prospective study.

Adrian J Marcus1, Kevin Lotzof, Adam Howard.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Lower limb angioplasty is commonly performed via antegrade common femoral artery (CFA) puncture, followed by selective superficial femoral artery (SFA) catheterization. Arterial access can be complicated by a "hostile groin" (scarring, obesity, or previous failed CFA puncture). We prospectively investigated color duplex ultrasound (CDU)-guided SFA access for radiological interventions.
METHODS: Antegrade CDU-guided CFA and SFA puncture were compared in 30 patients requiring intervention for severe leg ischemia who had hostile groins. Demographics, screen time, radiation dose, intervention, and complications were prospectively recorded.
RESULTS: Treatment in 30 patients involved 44 angioplasties (40 transluminal, 4 subintimal) and 2 diagnostic angiograms. Fifteen of these patients had CDU-guided CFA punctures; in 8 of these patients CDU-guided CFA puncture "failed" (i.e., there was failure to pass a guidewire or catheter into the CFA or SFA), necessitating immediate direct CDU-guided SFA puncture. Overall, the mean screen time and radiation dosage, via direct CDU-guided SFA puncture in 30 patients, was 4.8 min and 464 Gy cm(2) respectively. With CDU-guided CFA puncture, mean screen time (10 min), radiation dose (2023 Gy cm(2)), and complications (13%) were greater when compared with the SFA puncture results overall and in the same patients at subsequent similar procedures (2.7 min, 379 Gy cm(2) (p < 0.05), no complications in this subgroup). Five complications occurred: 2 each at CFA and SFA entry sites, and 1 angioplasty embolus.
CONCLUSIONS: The CDU-guided SFA puncture technique was both more effective than CDU-guided CFA access in patients with scarred groins, obesity, or failed CFA punctures and safer, with reduced screen times, radiation doses, and complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17295080     DOI: 10.1007/s00270-005-0347-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol        ISSN: 0174-1551            Impact factor:   2.740


  7 in total

1.  Ultrasound-guided antegrade femoral access: comparison between the common femoral artery and the superficial femoral artery.

Authors:  A Gutzeit; N Graf; E Schoch; T Sautter; R Jenelten; C A Binkert
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-12-28       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Ultrasound-guided arterial catheterization: a narrative review.

Authors:  Ariel L Shiloh; Lewis A Eisen
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2009-10-31       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 3.  Access and hemostasis: femoral and popliteal approaches and closure devices-why, what, when, and how?

Authors:  Iacopo Barbetta; Jos C van den Berg
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.513

4.  Starclose SE® hemostasis after 6F direct antegrade superficial femoral artery access distal to the femoral head for peripheral endovascular procedures in obese patients.

Authors:  Stavros Spiliopoulos; Panagiotis Kitrou; Nikolaos Christeas; Dimitris Karnabatidis
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 5.  Comparison of outcomes following transfemoral versus trans-subclavian approach for transcatheter aortic valve Implantation: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Amer Al-Balah; Danial Naqvi; Nour Houbby; Lueh Chien; Sayan Sen; Thanos Athanasiou; M Yousuf Salmasi
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2020-11-06

6.  Endovascular Interventions to Superficial Femoral Artery Occlusion: Different Approaches, Technique, and Follow-up.

Authors:  Santhosh Krishnappa; Jayasheelan Mambally Rachaiah; Harsha Mullusoge Mariappa; Chaitra Doddamadaiah; Manjunath Cholenahally Nanjappa
Journal:  Heart Views       Date:  2020-06-29

7.  An effective guidewire looping technique for the recanalization of occlusive segments of infrapopliteal vessels.

Authors:  Jian-bo Wang; Jun-gong Zhao; Ming-hua Li; Yue-qi Zhu; Jue Wang; Pei-lei Zhang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2010-06-21       Impact factor: 3.500

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.