| Literature DB >> 31772545 |
Birthe Sindberg1, Christel Gry Aagren Nielsen1, Marianne Hestbjerg Poulsen1, Martin Bøhme Rasmussen1, Steen Carstensen1, Troels Thim1, Lars Jakobsen1, Jacob Thorsted Sørensen1, Benedicte Haastrup2, Hanne Maare Søndergaard2, Michael Mæng1, Christian Juhl Terkelsen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The transradial approach is generally associated with few complications. However, periprocedural pain is still a common issue, potentially related to sheath insertion and/or arterial spasm, and may result in conversion to femoral access. Radial artery occlusion (RAO) following the procedure is also a potential risk. We evaluate whether the design of the sheath has any impact on these variables.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31772545 PMCID: PMC6739780 DOI: 10.1155/2019/7348167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Interv Cardiol ISSN: 0896-4327 Impact factor: 2.279
Figure 1Flowchart.
Figure 2Reverse Barbeau test. Type A-D according to pulse oximetry findings after removal of the TR band at compression of a.radialis and a.ulnaris, or a.ulnaris alone.
Baseline characteristics.
| Valid cases | Slender sheath | Standard sheath | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 999 (100%) | 67.2 (57.9-74.0) | 67.6 (59.3-74.9) | 0.26 |
|
| ||||
| CAG vs. PCI | 999 (100%) | 65% vs. 35% | 66% vs. 34% | 0.77 |
|
| ||||
| Diabetes | 904 (90%) | 18.5% | 19.3% | 0.77 |
|
| ||||
| Hypertension | 966 (97%) | 61.2% | 56.0% | 0.11 |
|
| ||||
| Hyperlipidemia | 971 (97%) | 54.5% | 59.8% | 0.10 |
|
| ||||
| Previous MI | 970 (97%) | 18.4% | 21.6% | 0.21 |
|
| ||||
| Previous PCI | 975 (98%) | 22.6 % | 25.8% | 0.25 |
|
| ||||
| BMI | 952 (95%) | 27.2 (24.7-30.7) | 26.8 (23.9-30.2) | 0.13 |
|
| ||||
| Systolic BP, mmHg | 999 (100%) | 135 (120-157) | 135 (120-155) | 0.88 |
|
| ||||
| Diastolic BP, mmHg | 999 (100%) | 70 (60-80) | 70 (60-80) | 0.75 |
|
| ||||
| Procedural time, minutes | ||||
| All patients | 996 (99.7%) | 21.8 (10.9-39.3) | 21.8 (10.9-35.0) | 0.73 |
| CAG alone | 13.1 (8.7-24.0) | 13.1 (8.7-24.0) | 0.58 | |
| CAG+PCI | 41.5 (28.4-61.2) | 35.0 (26.2-52.4) | 0.08 | |
|
| ||||
| French size | 0.60 | |||
| 5 | 128 (12.8%) | 63 (13.0%) | 65 (12.6%) | |
| 6 | 870 (87.1%) | 435 (87.0%) | 435 (87.2%) | |
| 7 | 1 (0.1%) | 1 (0.2%) | 0 (0 %) | |
Outcomes among patients treated with Slender versus Standard sheath during coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention.
| Valid cases | Slender sheath | Standard sheath | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximal pain, NRS | ||||
| During sheath insertion | 947 (95%) | 1 (0-3) | 2 (1-3) | 0.02 |
| During the procedure | 956 (96%) | 2 (1-4) | 2 (1-4) | 0.30 |
|
| ||||
| No conversion to femoral access | 999 (100%) | 436 (87%) | 451 (90%) | 0.16 |
|
| ||||
| Use of verapamil | 999 (100%) | 5 (1.0%) | 9 (1.8%) | 0.28 |
| Cumulated verapamil, mg. | 5 | 5 (5-5) | 5 (5-5) | |
|
| ||||
| Use of analgesics | 999 (100%) | 109 (22%) | 93 (19%) | 0.20 |
| Cumulated fentanyl, | 202 | 50 (50-99) | 50 (50-80) | 0.92 |
|
| ||||
| Use of sedative | 998 (99.9%) | 132 (27%) | 124 (25%) | 0.54 |
| Cumulated midazolam, mg. | 256 | 1.5 (1.2-2.5) | 1.5 (1.0-2.5) | 0.92 |
|
| ||||
| Reverse Barbeau test | 858 (86%) | 0.52 | ||
| A | 342 | 350 | ||
| B | 69 | 63 | ||
| C | 13 | 8 | ||
| D | 5 | 8 | ||
|
| ||||
| Number of catheters used | 997 (99.8%) | 2 (2-3) | 2 (2-3) | 0.55 |
|
| ||||
| Number of sheaths used | 996 (99.7%) | 1 (1-1) | 1 (1-1) | 0.06 |
|
| ||||
| Time to hemostasis, min. | 916 (91.7%) | 125 (101-165) | 129 (103-161) | 0.96 |
Figure 3Pain during sheath insertion.
Figure 4Results of Reverse Barbeau test.