Literature DB >> 23453102

Early and late outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention by radial or femoral approach in patients presenting in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock.

Ivo Bernat1, Eltigani Abdelaal, Guillaume Plourde, Yoann Bataille, Jakub Cech, Jan Pesek, Jiri Koza, Stepan Jirous, Jimmy Machaalany, Jean-Pierre Déry, Olivier Costerousse, Richard Rokyta, Olivier F Bertrand.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although radial approach is increasingly used in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) including in acute myocardial infarction (MI), patients with cardiogenic shock have been excluded from comparisons with femoral approach. The aim of our study was to compare clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary PCI with cardiogenic shock by radial and femoral approach. METHODS AND
RESULTS: From 2,663 patients presenting with ST-elevation MI in 2 large volume radial centers, we identified 197 patients (7.4%) with signs of cardiogenic shock immediately before undergoing primary PCI. Radial approach was used in 55% of cases when at least 1 radial artery was weakly palpable, either spontaneously or after intravenous noradrenaline bolus. Patients in the radial group were older (69 ± 12 vs 64 ± 12 years, P = .010), had less diabetes (13% vs 26%, P = .028), and required less often intubation prior PCI (42% vs 66%, P = .0006) or intraaortic balloon pump (36% vs 55%, P = .0096). Mortality at 1 year was 44% in the radial group and 64% in the femoral group (P = .0044). Independent predictors of late mortality included radial approach (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.98, P = .041), the use of glycoprotein IIb-IIIa receptor inhibitors (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40-0.96, P = .032), baseline creatinine ≥110 μmol/L (HR 3.34, 95% CI 2.20-5.12, P < .0001), initial glycemia >200 mg/dL (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.34-3.11, P = .0008), and age >65 years (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.18-2.79, P = .006).
CONCLUSION: Radial approach was safe and feasible in more than half of the patients with ST-elevation MI and cardiogenic shock treated by primary PCI. After adjustment for baseline and procedural characteristics, radial approach remained associated with better survival. However, prognosis of patients undergoing primary PCI in cardiogenic shock remains poor.
Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23453102     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.01.012

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  Comparison of radial to femoral PCI in acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sumeet Gandhi; Ron Kakar; Christopher B Overgaard
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  Interventional Radiology in Pelvic Trauma.

Authors:  Derek F Franco; Steven M Zangan
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 1.513

3.  Transradial versus transfemoral approach for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Muhammad Junaid Ahsan; Soban Ahmad; Azka Latif; Noman Lateef; Mohammad Zoraiz Ahsan; Waiel Abusnina; Sandeep Nathan; S Elissa Altin; Dhaval S Kolte; John C Messenger; Mark Tannenbaum; Andrew M Goldsweig
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2022-09-05

4.  The Role of the Transradial Approach for Complex Coronary Interventions in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Authors:  Sasko Kedev
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2013-08

Review 5.  Transradial Artery Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Matthew S Schoenfeld; Ibrahim Kassas; Binita Shah
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2018-02-24

6.  Improved in-hospital outcome for radial access in a large contemporary cohort of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Matthias Hasun; Jakob Dörler; Hannes F Alber; Axel Bauer; Rudolf Berger; Günter Christ; Matthias Frick; Uta C Hoppe; Kurt Huber; Gudrun Lamm; Elisabeth Laßnig; Dirk von Lewinski; Anna Rab; Franz X Roithinger; Herwig Schuchlenz; Peter Siostrzonek; Johann Sipötz; Thomas Stefenelli; Clemens Steinwender; Michael Edlinger; Franz Weidinger
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2021-06

7.  Therapeutic effects of percutaneous coronary intervention on acute myocardial infarction complicated with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

Authors:  Dajun Qian; Daqiong Zhou; Huan Liu; Di Xu
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.088

8.  Radial or femoral access in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): Does the choice matters?

Authors:  Mahesh Kumar Batra; Lajpat Rai; Naveed Ullah Khan; Muhammad Naeem Mengal; Sanam Khowaja; Syed Nadeem Hassan Rizvi; Tahir Saghir; Nadeem Qamar; Jawaid Akbar Sial; Musa Karim
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2020-05-21
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.