Premium
Transradial approach for noncoronary angiography and interventions
Author(s) -
Yamashita Takenori,
Imai Shigeki,
Tamada Tsutomu,
Yamamoto Akira,
Egashira Naoto,
Watanabe Shigeru,
Higashi Hiroki,
Gyoten Masayuki
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
catheterization and cardiovascular interventions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.988
H-Index - 116
eISSN - 1522-726X
pISSN - 1522-1946
DOI - 10.1002/ccd.21169
Subject(s) - medicine , radial artery , angiography , catheter , radiology , hematoma , psychological intervention , coronary angiography , surgery , myocardial infarction , artery , cardiology , psychiatry
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the feasibility and safety of a transradial approach for non‐coronary angiography and interventions. Background: Generally, the transradial approach is used for coronary angiography and intervention around the world, and experiences have been widely reported. However, few large studies have examined the transradial approach for vessels other than the coronary or cerebral artery. Methods: Subjects comprised 329 patients who underwent a total of 400 procedures (285 abdomens, 68 pelvises, and 47 lower limbs) with transradial angiography and interventions between January 1999 and June 2006. Normal Allen test results were confirmed before all procedures. A 130‐ or 150‐cm long 4F catheter modified to our own design was used for angiography and interventions such as transarterial embolization or transarterial chemotherapy. Results: Radial artery access was unachievable in 19 of the 400 procedures (4.8%). The radial artery was injured during 1 procedure (0.2%). In the remaining 380 procedures, sufficient angiography was obtained to grasp the condition of indispensable vessels for diagnosis and interventions scheduled in advance succeeded. Total transradial technical success rate in the series was 95%. Frequency of complications such as radial injury or radial spasm was 1.8%. No cases of local hematoma, hand ischemia, or cerebral infarction were encountered. Conclusion: The transradial approach was useful for non‐coronary angiography and interventions and offers the advantages of low risk and reduced stress on patients. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.