Key result
The transradial approach for cardiac catheterization presents specific anatomical impediments and complications that require dedicated techniques and preventative strategies to overcome successfully.
Why the study?
Anatomical impediments during transradial catheterization cause technical issues and complications, making a trial-and-error learning approach unjustifiable.
This review summarizes the anatomical impediments, technical difficulties, and complications associated with transradial catheterization, offering preventative strategies to overcome them.
Encourages radial-first strategies to cut complications; leaves open targeted solutions for anatomical impediments in complex cases.
Through the efforts of dedicated interventionists, catheterization of the cardiovascular system by transradial method has been recognized as the gold standard due to the several advantages associated with it, such as early ambulation, decline in bleeding and in various other vascular complications. It has successfully turned as an alternative to femoral access. The huge experience of interventionists has helped in understanding the anatomical impediments that can result in many technical issues and complications associated with the transradial approach. A trial-and-error method adopted by the interventionists on their learning curve at the cost of increased procedural failure, complications and patient inconvenience may not be justifiable. The objective of the present manuscript was to review all these difficulties, and understand the treatment method and various preventative strategies that can be used to overcome the complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dash et al. (2023) conducted a review in Cardiac catheterization via transradial approach. Transradial approach was evaluated. The transradial approach for cardiac catheterization presents specific anatomical impediments and complications that require dedicated techniques and preventative strategies to overcome successfully.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: