Literature DB >> 24791717

Transradial versus transfemoral coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: is transradial coronary intervention suitable for emergency PCI in high-risk acute myocardial infarction?

Atsushi Iga1, Kenji Wagatsuma, Junichi Yamazaki, Takanori Ikeda.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the clinical results of transradial coronary intervention (TRI) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of TRI and transfemoral coronary intervention (TFI) in AMI patients who had cardiogenic shock and underwent emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
METHODS: Between January 1, 2006, and August 31, 2012, a total of 507 consecutive patients with AMI underwent emergency PCI within 12 hours of onset. Eighty-five patients presented with cardiogenic shock and were enrolled. Among these patients, 60 underwent TRI and 25 underwent TFI. Outcome measures included the following: major bleeding and vascular complications; major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE); all-cause death; door-to-balloon time; and PCI procedural success.
RESULTS: TRI had a significantly lower rate of major bleeding and vascular complications within 30 days (6.7% vs. 28.0%; P<.05) and 1 year (log-rank P<.05) than TFI. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the MACCE rate within 30 days (28.3% vs. 44.0%; P=.21) and 1 year (log-rank P=.06), and the all-cause death rate within 30 days (26.7% vs. 40.0%; P=.30) and 1 year (log-rank P=.09). In addition, TRI was not inferior to TFI in terms of door-to-balloon time (99.8 min vs. 110.4 min; P=.30) and PCI procedural success (95.0% vs. 96.0%; P>.99).
CONCLUSION: TRI is associated with fewer major bleeding and vascular complications than TFI, and it appears suitable for both low- and high-risk AMI patients, especially when AMI is complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24791717

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol        ISSN: 1042-3931            Impact factor:   2.022


  5 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

2.  Radial artery applanation tonometry for continuous noninvasive arterial blood pressure monitoring in the cardiac intensive care unit.

Authors:  Nicolas Langwieser; Luisa Prechtl; Agnes S Meidert; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Christian Bradaric; Tareq Ibrahim; Karl-Ludwig Laugwitz; Roland M Schmid; Julia Y Wagner; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2015-01-25       Impact factor: 5.460

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

Review 4.  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

Review 5.  Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Ibrar Anjum; Muhammad Adnan Khan; Muhammad Aadil; Aniqa Faraz; Mudassir Farooqui; Amerah Hashmi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-06-03
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.