Key result
Radial and femoral access techniques should be viewed as complementary rather than dichotomous, with the choice of access tailored to the specific clinical subset and patient needs.
Why the study?
Does transradial access compared to transfemoral access improve outcomes in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention?
Does transradial access compared to transfemoral access improve outcomes in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention?
Both radial and femoral access techniques are complementary and should be tailored to the individual patient for optimal outcomes in complex PCI.
Supports tailored access selection in complex PCI; leaves open need for prospective trials to guide practice.
INTRODUCTION: Evolution in the technology used in the cardiac catheterization laboratory has permitted a migration from the femoral to radial artery access for many interventional procedures while concurrently improving outcomes. As a disruptive technology, transradial access has been associated with several controversies including a dichotomous relationship with femoral access. Areas covered: Several different patient subsets along with perceived technical challenges in interventional cardiology are reviewed with regard to the issue of access site. Evolving technological improvements germane to transradial techniques are also discussed as garnered from the literature of recent clinical trials and reports. Expert commentary: Radial techniques have been enhanced by newer technology and the spread of knowledge. Fusion of radial techniques with those of the femoral approach is evolving into a unifying concept of using the access that is most appropriate for the patient. No one access technique can cover all clinical subsets of patients. There is a need for complimentary access skillsets for even the most advanced cardiovascular technology used in the cardiac catheterization laboratory if the patients' outcomes are to be idealized.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gilchrist et al. (2017) conducted a review in Complex percutaneous coronary intervention. Radial artery access vs. Femoral artery access was evaluated. Radial and femoral access techniques should be viewed as complementary rather than dichotomous, with the choice of access tailored to the specific clinical subset and patient needs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: