Key result
In patients ≥70 years undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, radial access was associated with fewer major bleedings than femoral access.
Why the study?
Does radial artery access reduce in-hospital complications compared to femoral artery access in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Cohort (n=225)
Does radial artery access reduce in-hospital complications compared to femoral artery access in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
In elderly patients undergoing PCI, radial access is associated with significantly lower rates of bleeding and vascular complications compared to femoral access.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Radial access may lower major bleeding in elderly PCI patients; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
Background Studies demonstrate that radial artery access reduces the risk of vascular and bleeding complications associated to percutaneous coronary intervention. Our objective was to evaluate in-hospital results of the transradial approach in elderly patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods Prospective registry including patient’s ≥ 70 years of age; safety and efficacy endpoints were compared for the radial and femoral artery access groups. Results We included 255 patients, 117 (52%) treated using the radial approach and 108 using the femoral approach. Except for age, the remaining clinical characteristics did not show differences between groups. Male patients prevailed (60%), 36.7% were diabetic and over one third were diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome. Angiographic and procedure-related variables did not show differences between groups. When vascular complication rates were compared only hematomas < 5 cm (5.1% vs. 17.6%; p < 0.01) were more prevalent with the femoral access. Major bleedings, according to the ACUITY criteria (zero vs. 5.6%; p = 0.01) and minor bleedings, according to the TIMI criteria (zero vs. 7.4%; p < 0.01), were also more frequent in the femoral group. In-hospital clinical endpoints, death (0.9% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.06) and non-fatal infarction (zero vs. 3.7%; p = 0.05) were more frequent in patients treated by the femoral access. Conclusions In a non-selected patient population ≥ 70 years of age, percutaneous coronary intervention by radial access was associated to a lower incidence of in-hospital clinical endpoints, especially of bleeding events related to the vascular access route. RESUMO Acesso Radial vs. Acesso Femoral em Pacientes com Idade Avançada Submetidos à Intervenção Coronária Percutânea Introdução Estudos demonstram que o acesso via artéria radial diminui o risco de complicações vasculares e hemorrágicas associadas à intervenção coronária percutânea. Nosso objetivo foi avaliar os resultados hospitalares da utilização da via radial em pacientes idosos submetidos à intervenção coronária percutânea. Métodos Registro prospectivo, que incluiu pacientes ≥ 70 anos, tendo sido comparados os desfechos de segurança e de eficácia entre os grupos tratados pelas vias radial e femoral. Resultados Incluímos 225 pacientes, sendo 117 (52%) tratados por via radial e 108 por via femoral. À exceção da idade, as demais características clínicas não mostraram diferençãs entre os grupos. Predominaram os pacientes do sexo masculino (60%); 36,7% eram diabéticos e mais de um terço foi tratado na vigência de quadro de síndrome coronària aguda. As variáveis angiográficas e do procedimento não mostraram diferenças entre os grupos. Na comparação das taxas de complicaçães vasculares, somente os hematomas < 5 cm (5,1% vs. 17,6%; p < 0,01) foram mais prevalentes no acesso femoral. Sangramentos maiores, pelo critèrio ACUITY (zero vs. 5,6%; p = 0,01), e menores, pelo critèrio TIMI (zero vs. 7,4%; p < 0,01), também foram mais frequentes no grupo femoral. Os desfechos clínicos hospitalares óbito (0,9% vs. 5,6%; p = 0,06) e infarto não fatal (zero vs. 3,7%; p = 0,05) incidiram mais frequentemente nos pacientes tratados por via femoral. Conclusões Em uma população não selecionada de pacientes com idade ≥ 70 anos, a intervenção coronária percutânea por via radial esteve associada à menor incidencia de desfechos clínicos hospitalares, em especial de eventos hemorrágicos relacionados à via de acesso vascular.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zukowski et al. (2014) conducted a cohort in Percutaneous coronary intervention (n=225). Radial artery access vs. Femoral artery access was evaluated on Major bleedings (ACUITY criteria) (p=0.01). In patients ≥70 years undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, radial access was associated with fewer major bleedings than femoral access.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: