Abstract:Introduction: Recently, transradial access (TRA) for mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke has been proposed as an alternative due to potential advantages such as reduced access site complications. However, its safety and efficacy compared to the traditional transfemoral access (TFA) remain debated. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception to May 15, 2024. We included all randomized controlled trials and observational studies. The primary outcome was successful recanalization, defined as achieving Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) grades 2b-3. Secondary outcomes included complete recanalization (TICI grade 3), achieving TICI 2c or higher, functional outcomes (modified Rankin Score (mRS) at discharge and 90 days, mRS 0-2 at 90 days, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at discharge, Length of hospital stay (LOS)), procedural efficiency (access-to-perfusion time, first-pass reperfusion, mean number of passes, crossover to alternate approach), and safety/survival outcomes (access site complications, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, in-hospital and 90-day mortality). This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023462293). Results: The meta-analysis included 13 studies with a combined total of 4759 patients. No statistically significant difference was found between TRA and TFA for successful recanalization (RR = 1.00 [95 % CI, 0.97-1.04], P = 0.88). Analysis also showed no significant difference in favorable functional outcomes between groups (RR = 0.88, [95 % CI, 0.71-1.09], P = 0.25) with significant heterogeneity (P = 0.008, I² = 71 %), which was resolved by excluding the study of Phillips et al., 2020 (P = 0.58, I² = 0 %), then favoring TFA over TRA (RR = 0.80, [95 % CI, 0.70-0.92], P = 0.002). TFA also had a statistically significant lower risk of crossover to TRA (RR = 1.68, [95 % CI, 0.99-2.86], P = 0.05). Overall, TRA was associated with a significantly shorter length of stay (MD = -1.49, 95 % CI [-2.93 to -0.05], P = 0.04, I² = 75 %), though sensitivity analysis showed a non-significant mean difference still favoring TRA (MD = -0.59; 95 % CI: [-1.28 to -0.10], P = 0.09, I² = 0 %). There was no difference between TRA and TFA regarding complete recanalization, achieving TICI 2c or higher, procedural efficiency, functional outcomes, safety, and survival. Conclusion: Our updated meta-analysis demonstrates that TRA is comparable to TFA, except for a higher proportion of patients achieving mRS 0-2 at 90 days with TFA, lower crossover rates with TFA, and possibly a shorter length of stay (LOS) with TRA. Further research, particularly randomized studies, is needed to confirm these findings due to the observational nature of included studies.

Letter regarding ‘Radial first or patient first : a case series and meta-analysis of transradial (TRA) versus transfemoral (TFA) access for acute ischemic stroke intervention’

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

Transradial versus transfemoral access for mechanical thrombectomy: A single institution experience

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

Transradial versus transfemoral access for anterior circulation mechanical thrombectomy: analysis of 375 consecutive cases

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

Transradial versus transfemoral artery access in mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract 1122‐000067: Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy Following IV tPA Administration

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

Safety and Efficacy of Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy Procedures Following Intravenous Administration of Tissue Plasminogen Activator

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy in Stroke Patients: A Non-Inferiority Randomized Clinical Trial

Radial access for cerebrovascular procedures: Case report and technical note

Abstract 81: Radial versus Femoral Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients With Large Vessel Occlusion: A Randomized Clinical Trial

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

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

Transradial versus transfemoral access for cardiac catheterization: a nationwide pilot study of training preferences and expertise in The United States

Mechanical thrombectomy with a balloon-guide catheter: sheathless transradial versus transfemoral approach

Trans-Carotid and Trans-Radial Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients With Stroke: A Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract P516: A Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Performance of Carotid Angioplasty and Stent Placement

Comparison between transradial and transfemoral mechanical thrombectomy for ICA and M1 occlusions: insights from the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR)