Key result
The radial approach for primary or rescue PCI in elderly patients with AMI resulted in fewer vascular access site complications compared to the femoral approach (0% vs 2.9%, P<0.05).
Why the study?
Does the radial approach reduce vascular complications without delaying reperfusion compared to the femoral approach in elderly patients undergoing primary or rescue PCI for AMI?
Cohort (n=155)
Does the radial approach reduce vascular complications without delaying reperfusion compared to the femoral approach in elderly patients undergoing primary or rescue PCI for AMI?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 2.9%
p-value: p=<0.05
The radial approach for primary or rescue PCI in elderly patients is safe, effective, and reduces vascular complications compared to the femoral approach without significantly delaying reperfusion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Radial access was associated with fewer vascular complications in elderly AMI PCI; leaves open preference over femoral pending randomized confirmation.
Ziakas et al. (2007) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (n=155). Radial approach vs. Femoral approach was evaluated on Vascular access site complications (p=<0.05). The radial approach for primary or rescue PCI in elderly patients with AMI resulted in fewer vascular access site complications compared to the femoral approach (0% vs 2.9%, P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: