Cross-sectional study measures anatomical characteristics of the radial arteries in a South African population, indicating significant size variability.
Aims and objectives The distal forearm and snuffbox radial arteries are increasingly used as alternatives to femoral artery access for neurointerventional procedures due to their lower complication rates. However, vessel diameter variability and sheath compatibility remain important anatomical considerations. Although previous studies have investigated these arteries, limited data are available within African populations. This study aimed to investigate the anatomical characteristics of the distal forearm and snuffbox radial arteries using ultrasound in a select hospital-based South African population. Materials and methods This cross-sectional study included 256 participants (subset A: 128 adults; subset B: 128 paediatric participants) recruited from a central regional hospital in Durban, South Africa. Ultrasound measurements of the distal forearm and snuffbox radial arteries were obtained bilaterally. Results In subset A, the average diameter of the distal forearm radial artery was 1.94 ± 0.39 mm. Males demonstrated significantly larger diameters than females (2.12 ± 0.39 mm vs. 1.82 ± 0.34 mm, p < 0.001). The average snuffbox radial artery diameter was 1.33 ± 0.31 mm. In subset B, the average diameters of the distal forearm and snuffbox radial arteries were 1.12 ± 0.32 mm and 0.77 ± 0.20 mm, respectively. Body surface area, height, and wrist circumference correlated with vessel diameter, whereas BMI showed no significant association. Notably, 55% of adults and 99% of paediatric participants had distal forearm radial artery diameters below 2.00 mm. Conclusion These findings may provide anatomical reference data regarding radial artery calibre and sheath dimension relationships within this select hospital-based population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: