PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 31, 2026Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions2 citationsOpen Access

Diagnostic Yield and Safety of Invasive Coronary Function Testing After Radial Versus Femoral Access

View Full Paper
FAFleur W AdriaansenCCCaïa CrooijmansTJTijn P.J. Jansen

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate how access site impacts the diagnostic yield and safety of coronary function testing (CFT).
  • Data collected from the Netherlands Registry of Invasive Coronary Vasomotor Function Testing.
  • Patients who underwent CFT between December 2020 and July 2025 were included.
  • Comparative analysis of patients with radial access versus femoral access for CFT.
  • Total diagnostic yield of coronary vasomotor dysfunction was 78.5%.
  • No significant difference in prevalence between radial (79.2%) and femoral (75.3%) access (P = 0.1).
  • Conversion from radial to femoral access occurred in 3.7% of patients with higher spasm prevalence in the conversion group (79.4% vs. 67.7%; P = 0.04).
  • No differences in complication rates between the access groups.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronary vasomotor dysfunction is diagnosed by a coronary function testing (CFT). However, protocols vary, and the influence of access site and concomitant vasodilator medication on the diagnostic yield and safety of CFT is unclear. This study assessed the diagnostic yield and safety of CFT by radial access with intraarterial calcium channel blockers compared with CFT by femoral access. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Netherlands Registry of Invasive Coronary Vasomotor Function Testing, a Dutch multicenter collaboration on coronary function testing. Patients who underwent CFT between December 2020 and July 2025 were included. RESULTS: A total of 1885 patients were included, 1436 (76.2%) with primary radial access and 380 (20.2%) with primary femoral access. In 69 (3.7%) patients conversion from radial to femoral access was necessary. The conversion group was analyzed separately. The total diagnostic yield of coronary vasomotor dysfunction was 78.5%. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of coronary vasomotor dysfunction between patients with primary radial versus femoral access (79.2% versus 75.3%; P =0.1). There was also no difference in total diagnostic yield between the group without conversion and the conversion group (78.4% versus 82.6%; P =0.4); however, spasm was more prevalent in the conversion group (67.7% versus 79.4%; P =0.04). There were no differences in CFT complication rates between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Primary radial access with routine administration of calcium channel blockers was not associated with a lower diagnostic yield in CFT than primary femoral access. Procedural safety was comparable.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Adriaansen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69cb6556e6a8c024954b9794https://doi.org/10.1161/circinterventions.125.016450
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Safety, Feasibility, and Diagnostic Yield of Invasive Coronary Function Testing2025 · 21 citations
  2. 2Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Utility of Coronary Angiography Versus Coronary Function Testing in Women With Angina and Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries2024 · 4 citations
  3. 3Multivessel Coronary Function Testing Increases Diagnostic Yield in Patients With Angina and Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries2024 · 34 citations
  4. 4Radial Versus Femoral Access for Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: Insights From a Tertiary Academic Center in Johannesburg2026
  5. 5Feasibility and Impact of Invasive Coronary Function Testing in Ischemia and No Obstructive Coronary Arteries: A Single-Center Study2026