Key result
The transradial approach for primary PCI in STEMI patients significantly reduced door-to-balloon time compared to the transfemoral approach (76.4 vs. 86.5 minutes; P=0.008).
Why the study?
Does the transradial approach reduce door-to-balloon times compared to the transfemoral approach in patients undergoing primary PCI for acute STEMI?
Population
240 consecutive patients presenting with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction at a single tertiary care…
Comparison
Transradial approach for primary percutaneous… vs Transfemoral approach for primary percutaneous…
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Transradial access yields similar door-to-balloon times with fewer access complications in STEMI; supports feasibility but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Cohort (n=240)
No
Does the transradial approach reduce door-to-balloon times compared to the transfemoral approach in patients undergoing primary PCI for acute STEMI?
Absolute Event Rate: 76.4% vs 86.5%
p-value: p=0.008
Transradial access for primary PCI in STEMI does not compromise, and may even improve, door-to-balloon times compared to transfemoral access.
Weaver et al. (2009) conducted a cohort in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=240). Transradial approach (r-PCI) vs. Transfemoral approach (f-PCI) was evaluated on door-to-balloon (D2B) time (p=0.008). The transradial approach for primary PCI in STEMI patients significantly reduced door-to-balloon time compared to the transfemoral approach (76.4 vs. 86.5 minutes; P=0.008).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: