Key result
Tiger-2 catheter with right radial access was associated with significantly greater radiation exposure and more frequent catheter changes (31.7% vs 7.0%) compared to Judkins with left radial access.
Why the study?
The safety and efficiency of using a Tiger-2 catheter via right radial access compared to a Judkins catheter via left radial access had not been directly compared.
Does the Tiger-2 catheter with right radial access improve safety and efficiency compared to the Judkins catheter with left radial access in patients undergoing coronary angiography?
Observational (n=487)
Does the Tiger-2 catheter with right radial access improve safety and efficiency compared to the Judkins catheter with left radial access in patients undergoing coronary angiography?
Judkins catheter with left radial access appears to be a safer option for coronary angiography due to lower radiation exposure and fewer catheter changes compared to Tiger-2 with right radial access, despite requiring more contrast.
Left radial Judkins access may lower radiation exposure; leaves open optimal catheter-access strategy pending randomized trials.
We sought to compare the safety and efficiency of Tiger-2 in the right radial and Judkins catheter in the left radial access. We retrospectively collected data of 487 patients, involving 172 patients after coronary angiography with Judkins on the left radial artery and 315 patients with Tiger-2 on the right radial artery access. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, except for hypertension ratio and mean age. There was a difference in pulse absence on the radial artery. The volume of contrast used was higher in the Judkins group. Both groups differed in the amount of drugs administered (NTG and heparin). Fluorescence times were comparable between groups. Radiation dosage and AK was significantly greater in the Tiger-2 group. The Tiger-2 catheters were significantly more often changed to another type of catheter (100 changes) than the Judkins (12 changes). However, there was no statistical difference in access site change. Judkins with left radial access seems to be a safer option because of the lower radiation exposure and less incidence of complications than Tiger-2 with right radial access, however, it requires a higher volume of contrast.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klimek et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Coronary angiography (n=487). Tiger-2 catheter with right radial artery access vs. Judkins catheter with left radial artery access was evaluated on Safety and efficiency. Tiger-2 catheter with right radial access was associated with significantly greater radiation exposure and more frequent catheter changes (31.7% vs 7.0%) compared to Judkins with left radial access.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: