Premium
One or two diagnostic catheters with radial access: Does single yield celerity or double cause trouble?
Author(s) -
Blankenship James C.
Publication year - 2020
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.29163
Subject(s) - medicine , catheter , fluoroscopy , radial artery , coronary angiography , occlusion , randomized controlled trial , meta analysis , complication , radiology , surgery , cardiology , artery , myocardial infarction
Key Points One‐third of interventionalists still use dedicated left and right coronary catheters for diagnostic angiography with radial access, despite some evidence that a single “universal” catheter strategy is superior. This meta‐analysis of seven randomized controlled studies of one‐ versus two‐catheter strategies with radial access showed no differences in procedural time, fluoroscopy time, or contrast use. Use of an additional catheter was more frequent with the one‐catheter strategy but radial spasm was more common with a two‐catheter strategy. This meta‐analysis did not address cost, complication rates, or radial occlusion rates. Differences in these factors, if found in future studies, may yet prove one strategy or the other to be superior.