M. Haisum MaqsoodCelina M. YongSunil V. RaoMauricio D. CohenSamir PancholySripal BangaloreDepartment of Cardiology,DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center,Methodist Hospital,TX (M.H.M.).Division of Cardiovascular Medicine,Stanford University School of Medicine,CA (C.M.Y.).Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System,CA (C.M.Y.).Division of Cardiovascular Medicine,New York University Grossman School of Medicine (S.V.R.,S.B.).Heart,Thoracic and Vascular Institute,Cleveland Clinic Florida,Weston (M.D.C.).Division of Cardiology,The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education,Scranton (S.P.).

Abstract:Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, Ahead of Print. BACKGROUND:Radial artery access for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces the risk of death, bleeding, and vascular complications and is preferred over femoral artery access, leading to a class 1 indication by clinical practice guidelines. However, alternate upper extremity access such as distal radial and ulnar access are not mentioned in the guidelines despite randomized trials. We aimed to evaluate procedural outcomes with femoral, radial, distal radial, and ulnar access sites in patients undergoing coronary angiography or PCI.METHODS:PubMed, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for randomized clinical trials that compared at least 2 of the 4 access sites in patients undergoing PCI or angiography. Primary outcomes were major bleeding and access site hematoma. Intention-to-treat mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis was performed.RESULTS:From 47 randomized clinical trials that randomized 38 924 patients undergoing coronary angiography or PCI, when compared with femoral access, there was a lower risk of major bleeding with radial access (odds ratio [OR], 0.46 [95% CI, 0.35–0.59]) and lower risk of access site hematoma with radial (OR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.24–0.48]), distal radial (OR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.20–0.56]), and ulnar (OR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.31–0.83]) access. However, when compared with radial access, there was higher risk of hematoma with ulnar access (OR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.03–2.14]).CONCLUSIONS:Data from randomized trials support guideline recommendation of class 1 for the preference of radial access over femoral access in patients undergoing coronary angiography or PCI. Moreover, distal radial and ulnar access can be considered as a default secondary access site before considering femoral access.REGISTRATION:URL:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifier: CRD42024512365.

Radial Approach for Patients with ST-segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: It is Definitely the Best Access Site.

The efficacy and safety of transradial versus transfemoral approach for percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction

Transradial Approach for Coronary Intervention in 92 Cases

Complications of Radial vs Femoral Access For Coronary Angiography and Intervention: What Do The Data Tell Us?

Distal Radial Artery Access is a Safe and Feasible Technique in the Anatomical Snuffbox for Visceral Intervention

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Transradial Access for Carotid Artery Stenting

Radial Access Approach to Peripheral Vascular Interventions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Comparison between transradial and transfemoral approaches for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction

Transradial Approach for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Transradial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the next standard of care?

Transradial cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention: a review

Radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Trial sequential analysis

Distal versus traditional radial access in patients undergoing emergency coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Procedural Outcomes With Femoral, Radial, Distal Radial, and Ulnar Access for Coronary Angiography: A Network Meta-Analysis

Routine use of the transradial approach in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: procedural aspects and outcomes in 2209 patients treated in a single high-volume centre

Early prevention of radial artery occlusion via distal transradial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Direct coronary stenting by transradial approach: rationale and technical issues

Transradial Approach for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in 618 Cases

Radial artery access is associated with lower mortality in patients undergoing primary PCI: a report from the SWEDEHEART registry

Sex differences in transradial access failure in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction

A simple and easy technique to overcome anatomic challenges of transradial access in STEMI patients