English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aim: Coronary interventions are increasingly being performed via the radial rather than femoral route because of the lower complication rate. Compression devices such as the TR band are used to achieve hemostasis after the procedure. At present, there are no clear protocols for the deflation of the band. In this study we compared two protocols (early deflation with increased intervals vs. late deflation with smaller intervals) in terms of total time to band removal and complications, and patient and staff satisfaction. Methods: All patients who underwent a transradial coronary procedure and had a TR band fitted were enrolled into the study. The TR band was applied using the patent hemostasis method (2 ml air pushed in after the radial pulse appears on pulse oximetry after full occlusion with 16 ml air). Patients were randomly assigned to either protocol. Protocol 1 involved removal of 2 ml of air starting 1 hour after the sheath removal and then removal of 2 ml every 30 minutes until the band came off. Protocol 2 involved removal of 4 ml of air 2 hours after the sheath removal and then further 4 ml of air every 15 minutes until the band came off. Patient and staff satisfaction was measured with a visual analogue scale. Results: A total of 174 patients were recruited (mean age, 60 ± 11 years; 127 male, 47 female). The baseline characteristics including total heparin dose and type of procedure, in the two arms were the same. Protocol 2 (n 1⁄4 84) was associated with a significantly lower time to TR band removal as compared to protocol 1 (n 1⁄4 90; 201 ± 43 min vs. 274 ± 54 min; p < 0.001). There was no difference in complications such as bleeding or hematoma formation between the two groups. Patient satisfaction was the same between the two groups. However, the staff preferred protocol 1 ( p1⁄4 0.01). Conclusion: A protocol of delayed initiation of TR band deflation followed by quick deflations is associated with a lower time to band removal with no increase in bleeding complications or patient satisfaction. However, the staff preferred longer intervals between deflations.

Comparison between two protocols for deflation of the TR band following coronary procedures via the radial route