Retrospective cohort analysis shows reduced complications with distal transradial access in CHD patients, suggesting potential benefits over standard transradial access.
Objective: To explore the efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through the distal transradial access (dTRA) for the treatment of coronary heart disease (CHD). Methodology: This retrospective cohort analysis included records of CHD patients who underwent PCI in Wujin People’s Hospital between January, 2023 to December, 2024. Patients (n=107) were grouped based on the access method. Patients (n=55) who received dTRA comprised the dTRA group, and patients (n=52) who received standard transradial access (TRA) comprised the TRA group. Basic clinical information, surgery-related indicators, and the incidence and types of complications were compared between the dTRA and TRA groups. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the initial puncture success rate, puncture frequency, contrast agent dosage, X-ray exposure time, and surgical time between the two groups (all P>0.05). The dTRA group had a longer puncture time than the TRA group, but the postoperative compression time was significantly reduced (both P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of individual complications between the two groups (both P>0.05). However, the total number of complications in the dTRA group was significantly lower than that in the TRA group (10.9% vs. 28.8%) (P<0.05). Conclusions: Compared with TRA, dTRA has certain advantages in the PCI treatment of CHD, especially in terms of reducing the postoperative compression time and the overall incidence of complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ge et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: