Literature DB >> 21167351

Transradial approach (left vs right) and procedural times during percutaneous coronary procedures: TALENT study.

Alessandro Sciahbasi1, Enrico Romagnoli, Francesco Burzotta, Carlo Trani, Alessandro Sarandrea, Francesco Summaria, Gianluca Pendenza, Antonella Tommasino, Roberto Patrizi, Mario Mazzari, Rocco Mongiardo, Ernesto Lioy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: most of the studies assessing transradial approach for coronary angiography (CA) have been performed through right radial approach (RRA). Our aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of left radial approach (LRA) compared with RRA for coronary procedures.
METHODS: from January 2009 to December 2009, in 2 hospitals, 1,540 patients were randomized to RRA (770 patients) or LRA (770 patients) for percutaneous coronary procedures. The primary end point was fluoroscopy time for CA and for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) evaluated independently. Prespecified subgroup analyses according to patient age and operator experience were planned.
RESULTS: in 1,467 patients (732 RRA and 735 LRA), a CA (diagnostic group) was performed, and in 688 (344 each for RRA and LRA), a PCI. In the diagnostic group, LRA was associated with significantly lower fluoroscopy time (149 seconds, interquartile range [IQR] 95-270 seconds) and dose area product fluoroscopy (10.7 Gy cm(2), IQR 6-20.5 Gy cm(2)) compared with the RRA (168 seconds, IQR 110-277 seconds, P = .0025 and 12.1 Gy cm(2), IQR 7-23.8 Gy cm(2), P = .004, respectively). In the PCI group, there were no significant differences in fluoroscopy time (614 seconds, IQR 367-1,087 seconds for LRA and 695 seconds, IQR 415-1,235 seconds, P = .087 for RRA) and dose area product fluoroscopy (53.7 Gy cm(2), IQR 29-101 Gy cm(2) for LRA and 63.1 Gy cm(2), IQR 31-119 Gy cm(2), P = .17 for RRA). According to subgroup analyses, the differences between LRA and RRA were confined to older patients (≥ 70 years old) and to operators in training.
CONCLUSIONS: left radial approach for coronary diagnostic procedures is associated with lower fluoroscopy time and radiation dose adsorbed by patients compared with the RRA, particularly in older patients and for operators in training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21167351     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.10.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  32 in total

1.  Operator radiation exposure during transradial coronary angiography : Effect of single vs. double catheters.

Authors:  A Tarighatnia; L Pourafkari; A Farajollahi; A H Mohammadalian; M Ghojazadeh; N D Nader
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 1.443

2.  The case of successful catheter ablation using only the approach from the upper part of the subject's body, with meandering aorta and implanted IVC filter.

Authors:  Daisuke Sato; Hajime Otani; Satoko Higashiyama; Fujita Masanori; Junji Iwasaka; Haengnam Park; Yoshihiro Yamamoto; Naoki Minato; Toshiji Iwasaka
Journal:  J Cardiol Cases       Date:  2011-08-19

Review 3.  Vascular access and closure in coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention.

Authors:  Robert A Byrne; Salvatore Cassese; Maryam Linhardt; Adnan Kastrati
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 32.419

4.  Effect of Left Versus Right Radial Artery Approach for Coronary Angiography on Radiation Parameters in Patients With Predictors of Transradial Access Failure.

Authors:  Binita Shah; Joseph Burdowski; Yu Guo; Bryan Velez de Villa; Andrew Huynh; Meena Farid; Mansi Maini; Claudia Serrano-Gomez; Cezar Staniloae; Frederick Feit; Michael J Attubato; James Slater; John Coppola
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2016-05-28       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention safety before and during the establishment of a transradial program at a teaching hospital.

Authors:  Robert A Leonardi; Jacob C Townsend; D Dirk Bonnema; Chetan A Patel; Michael T Gibbons; Thomas M Todoran; Christopher D Nielsen; Eric R Powers; Daniel H Steinberg
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-01-14       Impact factor: 2.778

6.  Expert Opinion: Transradial Coronary Artery Procedures: Tips for Success.

Authors:  Kully Sandhu; Robert Butler; James Nolan
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2017-05

7.  Evaluation of radiological risk during coronary angioplasty procedures: comparison of transradial and transfemoral approaches.

Authors:  Piotr Iwachow; Izabela Miechowicz; Piotr Kałmucki; Beata Dziki; Andrzej Szyszka; Artur Baszko; Tomasz Siminiak
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 2.357

8.  Transradial approach as a default route in coronary artery interventions.

Authors:  Jang-Young Kim; Junghan Yoon
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 3.243

9.  Advantages of a workbench reshaped AR1 mod catheter for right coronary angiography by right radial approach.

Authors:  Cesare Baldi; Marco Mirra; Marco Di Maio; Tiziana Attisano; Michele Roberto Di Muro; Francesco Vigorito; Rosario Farina; Maria Vincenza Polito; Pietro Giudice; Federico Piscione
Journal:  Interv Med Appl Sci       Date:  2014-03-14

10.  Radiation exposure during coronary angiography via transradial or transfemoral approaches when performed by experienced operators.

Authors:  Binita Shah; Sripal Bangalore; Frederick Feit; Gregory Fernandez; John Coppola; Michael J Attubato; James Slater
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.749

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.