Key result
Percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access was suggested to be as safe and effective as open surgical access.
Why the study?
The axillary artery is rarely atherosclerotic, making it a useful alternative access site for large-bore interventions.
Is percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access as safe and effective as open surgical access for large-bore interventions?
Systematic Review
Is percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access as safe and effective as open surgical access for large-bore interventions?
Percutaneous axillary access is a safe and effective alternative to open surgical access for large-bore interventions.
Supports percutaneous axillary access as alternative to surgery; extends evidence for less invasive large-bore vascular approaches.
The axillary artery is a useful alternative access site for large-bore interventions as it is rarely atherosclerotic. This systematic review of percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access suggests that it is as safe and effective as open surgical access. The Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Expert Consensus Statement will soon be convened to provide best practice recommendations on transaxillary access including technique, training, and safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seto et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review in Large-bore interventions. Percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access vs. Open surgical access was evaluated on Safety and effectiveness. Percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access was suggested to be as safe and effective as open surgical access.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: