Key result
One-catheter concepts did not significantly reduce coronary angiography time compared with two-catheter concepts (603 vs 552 seconds; P=0.052), but increased contrast volume and fluoroscopy time.
Why the study?
Does a one-catheter concept reduce angiography time compared to a two-catheter concept in patients undergoing transradial coronary angiography?
RCT (n=300)
Single-blind
2:1 ratio
No
Does a one-catheter concept reduce angiography time compared to a two-catheter concept in patients undergoing transradial coronary angiography?
One-catheter concepts for transradial coronary angiography do not reduce procedure time and are associated with increased contrast use, longer fluoroscopy time, and higher crossover rates compared to standard two-catheter concepts.
Two-catheter concepts remain standard for transradial angiography; challenges one-catheter adoption on efficiency grounds.
The Use of Different Diagnostic Catheters-Radial-Trial sought to compare the safety and efficacy of one-catheter concepts (OCC) using Tiger II or BLK catheters with two-catheter concepts (TCC) using standard Judkins catheters for transradial coronary angiography. A total of 300 patients planed for coronary angiography were enrolled into this single-center, single-blinded trial. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either OCC by Tiger II (n = 100) and BLK (n = 100) or TCC by Judkins (n = 100) catheters. Primary end point was time required to perform a complete coronary angiography. Coronary angiography duration was 603 ± 29 seconds and 552 ± 26 sec in the OCC and the TCC groups (p = 0.052). Fluoroscopy time was longer in the OCC (408 ± 28 sec) as compared with the TCC group (258 ± 28 sec, p = 0.009) and the amount of contrast volume used significantly higher (98 ± 5 ml vs 67 ± 4 ml, p < 0.001). Crossover rates were increased in the OCC as compared with the TCC group (37% vs 4%, p < 0.001). These effects were observed irrespective of OCC catheter type. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that OCC do not reduce angiography time, but are associated with an increased amount of contrast volume and longer fluoroscopy time as compared with TCC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schneider et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Coronary angiography (n=300). One-catheter concepts (OCC) using Tiger II or BLK catheters vs. Two-catheter concepts (TCC) using standard Judkins catheters was evaluated on Time required to perform a complete coronary angiography (p=0.052). One-catheter concepts did not significantly reduce coronary angiography time compared with two-catheter concepts (603 vs 552 seconds; P=0.052), but increased contrast volume and fluoroscopy time.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: