-
Something wrong with this record ?
Retrospective analysis of coronary interventions in a single centre and comparison of specific differences between radial and femoral access
J. Rychlik, I. Hornacek, M. Tejc, E. Petrikovits, Z. Klimsa,
Language English Country Great Britain
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article
- MeSH
- Femoral Artery * diagnostic imaging injuries MeSH
- Radial Artery * diagnostic imaging injuries MeSH
- Radiation Dosage MeSH
- Risk Assessment MeSH
- Incidence MeSH
- Coronary Angiography adverse effects methods MeSH
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention adverse effects methods MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Aneurysm, False epidemiology MeSH
- Catheterization, Peripheral adverse effects methods MeSH
- Vascular System Injuries epidemiology MeSH
- Punctures MeSH
- Radiation Exposure MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Risk Factors MeSH
- Cardiac Catheterization adverse effects methods MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic MeSH
Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse the consequence of radial or femoral access during coronary interventions to radiation dose, fluorography time and a number of pseudoaneurysms following each type of intervention. Background: According to the results of many recent studies (RIVAL, RIFLE-STEACS, STEMI RADIAL), current guidelines favour radial over femoral access during coronary intervention for safety, especially in cases of acute coronary syndromes. However, several papers have referred to problems in the design of these studies and the management of antithrombotic therapy. The influence of access site on radiation dose and fluorography time is also still unclear. Methods: We retrospectively analysed 4522 patients who underwent coronary angiography in 2012 and 2016 in a single centre in the Czech Republic. We compared the access site with the average radiation dose and mean effective dose that each patient received in Gy/cm2 or mSv, respectively. We also compared average fluorography time in minutes and the incidence of pseudoaneurysms. Results: The radiation dose was a body mass index (BMI)-dependent parameter since each five points of body mass index increased radiation dose approximately by 23%. Use of femoral access resulted in lower fluorography time in all subgroups (p < .001) and decreased radiation dose in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs) by 26% (p = .044). On the other hand, there has been 16 times lower frequency (p < .001) of post-catheterisation pseudoaneurysms after radial access than after femoral access. Conclusions: Both the radiation dose and fluorography time were lower after femoral access compared to radial access in patients with CABGs. On the other hand, radial access led to significantly fewer periprocedural pseudoaneurysms. Radial access therefore should be considered as the preferred access site during coronary intervention in patients with a high risk of pseudoaneurysm development, and femoral access should be considered for patients with a high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.
b Kardiocentrum Vysocina Jihlava Czech Republic
Department of Cardiology Jihlava Hospital Jihlava Czech Republic
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc20006785
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20200526132347.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 200511s2019 xxk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1080/00015385.2018.1494115 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)30193077
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxk
- 100 1_
- $a Rychlik, Jakub $u a Department of Cardiology, Jihlava Hospital , Jihlava , Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Retrospective analysis of coronary interventions in a single centre and comparison of specific differences between radial and femoral access / $c J. Rychlik, I. Hornacek, M. Tejc, E. Petrikovits, Z. Klimsa,
- 520 9_
- $a Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse the consequence of radial or femoral access during coronary interventions to radiation dose, fluorography time and a number of pseudoaneurysms following each type of intervention. Background: According to the results of many recent studies (RIVAL, RIFLE-STEACS, STEMI RADIAL), current guidelines favour radial over femoral access during coronary intervention for safety, especially in cases of acute coronary syndromes. However, several papers have referred to problems in the design of these studies and the management of antithrombotic therapy. The influence of access site on radiation dose and fluorography time is also still unclear. Methods: We retrospectively analysed 4522 patients who underwent coronary angiography in 2012 and 2016 in a single centre in the Czech Republic. We compared the access site with the average radiation dose and mean effective dose that each patient received in Gy/cm2 or mSv, respectively. We also compared average fluorography time in minutes and the incidence of pseudoaneurysms. Results: The radiation dose was a body mass index (BMI)-dependent parameter since each five points of body mass index increased radiation dose approximately by 23%. Use of femoral access resulted in lower fluorography time in all subgroups (p < .001) and decreased radiation dose in patients with coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs) by 26% (p = .044). On the other hand, there has been 16 times lower frequency (p < .001) of post-catheterisation pseudoaneurysms after radial access than after femoral access. Conclusions: Both the radiation dose and fluorography time were lower after femoral access compared to radial access in patients with CABGs. On the other hand, radial access led to significantly fewer periprocedural pseudoaneurysms. Radial access therefore should be considered as the preferred access site during coronary intervention in patients with a high risk of pseudoaneurysm development, and femoral access should be considered for patients with a high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.
- 650 _2
- $a nepravé aneurysma $x epidemiologie $7 D017541
- 650 _2
- $a srdeční katetrizace $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D006328
- 650 _2
- $a periferní katetrizace $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D002406
- 650 _2
- $a koronární angiografie $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D017023
- 650 12
- $a arteria femoralis $x diagnostické zobrazování $x zranění $7 D005263
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a incidence $7 D015994
- 650 _2
- $a koronární angioplastika $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D062645
- 650 _2
- $a punkce $7 D011677
- 650 12
- $a arteria radialis $x diagnostické zobrazování $x zranění $7 D017534
- 650 _2
- $a dávka záření $7 D011829
- 650 _2
- $a radiační expozice $7 D000069079
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 650 _2
- $a hodnocení rizik $7 D018570
- 650 _2
- $a rizikové faktory $7 D012307
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 650 _2
- $a poranění cév $x epidemiologie $7 D057772
- 651 _2
- $a Česká republika $x epidemiologie $7 D018153
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Hornacek, Ivan $u b Kardiocentrum Vysocina , Jihlava , Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Tejc, Miloslav $u b Kardiocentrum Vysocina , Jihlava , Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Petrikovits, Erik $u b Kardiocentrum Vysocina , Jihlava , Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Klimsa, Zdenek $u a Department of Cardiology, Jihlava Hospital , Jihlava , Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008997 $t Acta cardiologica $x 1784-973X $g Roč. 74, č. 4 (2019), s. 325-330
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30193077 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20200511 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20200526132343 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1525643 $s 1096841
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $b 74 $c 4 $d 325-330 $e 20180907 $i 1784-973X $m Acta cardiologica $n Acta Cardiol $x MED00008997
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20200511