Literature DB >> 26704032

Meta-Analysis of Radial Versus Femoral Access for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Chirag Bavishi1, Sadik R Panwar2, George D Dangas2, Nitin Barman2, Choudhury M Hasan2, Usman Baber2, Annapoorna S Kini2, Samin K Sharma3.   

Abstract

Radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to reduce mortality and vascular complications compared to femoral access in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. However, efficacy and safety of radial access PCI in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS) is not well understood. A systematic search of electronic databases was performed through July 2015 to search and identify relevant studies. We evaluated the following short-term outcomes: all-cause mortality, major bleeding, access site bleeding, and need for blood transfusions. In addition, we evaluated 1-year mortality. Studies were pooled using random effects model. Nine studies including a total of 220,126 patients (radial approach: 94,663 patients [43%], femoral approach: 125,463 patients [57%]) were included in the analysis. On pooled analysis, no significant difference in incidence of short-term all-cause mortality was found between radial and femoral access (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.07, p = 0.12). Radial access was associated with significant reduction in major bleeding (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.73, p = 0.0002), access-site bleeding (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.78, p = 0.007), and need for blood transfusions (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91, p = 0.02). Furthermore, the 1-year mortality was significantly lower in radial approach (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.95, p = 0.02). In conclusion, in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI, radial access is associated with decreased bleeding and access-site complications.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26704032     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.10.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  5 in total

1.  Medicolegal implications of radial and femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in 2016: Focus on retroperitoneal hemorrhage.

Authors:  Konstantinos V Voudris; Mladen I Vidovich
Journal:  J Transl Int Med       Date:  2016-04-14

2.  Manual versus mechanical compression hemostasis approach after coronary angiography via snuffbox access.

Authors:  Farshad Roghani-Dehkordi; Elham Zangeneh; Mohammad Kermani-Alghoraishi
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 1.596

3.  Bivalirudin versus Heparin plus Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors in Women Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Haiyan Xu; Bingjian Wang; Jing Yang; Shuren Ma; Xiongwei Xie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Second-generation drug-eluting stents in the elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome: the in-hospital and 12-month follow-up of the all-comer registry.

Authors:  Wojciech Wańha; Damian Kawecki; Tomasz Roleder; Beata Morawiec; Sylwia Gładysz; Adam Kowalówka; Tomasz Jadczyk; Barbara Adamus; Tomasz Pawłowski; Grzegorz Smolka; Maciej Kaźmierski; Andrzej Ochała; Ewa Nowalany-Kozielska; Wojciech Wojakowski
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.636

5.  The Rise of Transradial Artery Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes in Australia.

Authors:  Ryan James Ocsan; Ata Doost; Paul Marley; Ahmad Farshid
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 2.279

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.