• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Sun, 23.06.24

Search results


May 2016
Dan Levin, Salim Adawi MD, David A Halon MBChB, Avinoam Shiran MD, Ihab Asmer, Ronen Rubinshtein MD and Ronen Jaffe MD

Background: Radial artery occlusion (RAO) may occur following transradial catheterization, precluding future use of the vessel for vascular access or as a coronary bypass graft. Recanalization of RAO may occur; however, long-term radial artery patency when revascularization is more likely to be required has not been investigated. Transradial catheterization is usually performed via 5-Fr or 6-Fr catheters. Insertion of 7-Fr sheaths into the radial artery enables complex coronary interventions but may increase the risk of RAO. 

Objective: To assess the long-term radial artery patency following transradial catheterization via 7-Fr sheaths.

Methods: Antegrade radial artery blood flow was assessed by duplex-ultrasound in 43 patients who had undergone transradial catheterization via a 7-Fr sheath. 

Results: All patients had received intravenous unfractionated heparin with a mean activated clotting time (ACT) of 247 ± 56 seconds. Twenty-four patients (56%) had received a glycoprotein IIbIIIa inhibitor and no vascular site complications had occurred. Mean time interval from catheterization to duplex-ultrasound was 507 ± 317 days. Asymptomatic RAO was documented in 8 subjects (19%). Reduced body weight was the only significant univariate predictor of RAO (78 ± 11 vs. 89 ± 13 kg, P = 0.031). In a bivariate model using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves, the combination of lower weight and shorter ACT offered best prediction of RAO (area under the ROC curve 0.813). 

Conclusions: Asymptomatic RAO was found at late follow-up in approximately 1 of 5 patients undergoing transradial catheterization via a 7-Fr sheath and was associated with lower body weight and shorter ACT. 

 

October 2010
R.O. Escarcega, J. Carlos Perez-Alva, M. Jimenez-Hernandez, C. Mendoza-Pinto, R. Sanchez Perez, R. Sanchez Porras and M. Garcia-Carrasco

Background: On-site cardiac surgery is not widely available in developing countries despite a high prevalence of coronary artery disease.

Objectives: To analyze the safety, feasibility and cost-effectiveness of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention without on-site cardiac surgery in a community hospital in a developing country.

Methods: Of the 174 patients who underwent PCI[1] for the first time in our center, we analyzed two groups: stable coronary disease and acute myocardial infarction. The primary endpoint was the rate of complications during the first 24 hours after PCI. We also analyzed the length of hospital stay and the rate of hospital readmission in the first week after PCI, and compared costs between the radial and femoral approaches.

Results: The study group comprised 131 patients with stable coronary disease and 43 with acute MI[2]. Among the patients with stable coronary disease 8 (6.1%) had pulse loss, 12 (9.16%) had on-site hematoma, and 3 (2.29%) had bleeding at the site of the puncture. Among the patients with acute MI, 3 (6.98) had pulse loss and 5 (11.63%) had bleeding at the site of the puncture. There were no cases of atriovenous fistula or nerve damage. In the stable coronary disease group, 130 patients (99%) were discharged on the same day (2.4 ± 2 hours). In the acute MI group, the length of stay was 6.6 ± 2.5 days with at least 24 hours in the intensive care unit. There were no hospital readmissions in the first week after the procedure. The total cost, which includes equipment related to the specific approach and recovery room stay, was significantly lower with the radial approach compared to the femoral approach (US$ 500 saving per intervention).

Conclusions: The transradial approach was safe and feasible in a community hospital in a developing country without on-site cardiac surgery backup. The radial artery approach is clearly more cost effective than the femoral approach.






[1] PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention



[2] MI = myocardial infarction


Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel