Comparison of Clinical Value between Right Distal Radial Artery Access and Right Radial Artery Access in Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Objective:To compare the feasibility and safety between right distal radial artery access and right radial artery access in patients undergoing coronary angiography(CAG)or percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI).Methods:On the basis of arterial access,113 patients who underwent CAG or PCI in Kunshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine between January and October 2018 were divided into two groups:a right distal radial artery group(52 patients)and a right radial artery group(61 patients).We collected general information,the number of puncture attempts,access times,postoperative compression time,and complications.Results:The general characteristics,rate of successful radial artery puncture,and rate of successful catheter placement in the two groups were not different.The right radial artery group had fewer puncture attempts(1.26±0.44 times vs.2.19±0.53 times,P=0.001)and a shorter access time(3.23±0.86 min vs.4.77±1.49 min,P=0.001)than the right distal radial artery group.However,the postoperative compression time in the right distal radial artery group was shorter(3.44±0.9 h vs.7.16±1.21 h,P=0.001).Two cases of bleeding,four cases of hematoma,and one case of artery occlusion in the right radial artery group and one case of hematoma in the right distal artery group occurred before discharge.The rate of total complications in the right distal radial artery group was lower than in the right radial artery group(1.93%vs.11.48%,P=0.048).Conclusion:CAG or PCI through the right distal radial artery is feasible and safe.

Comparison of distal radial artery access and conventional transradial access for percutaneous coronary intervention

Background Distal radial artery access(DRA)has emerged as an alternative to conventional transradial access(TRA)for percutaneous coronary interventions(PCI).This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of DRA versus TRA.Methods A total of 873 participants were enrolled,divided into the DRA group(n=236)and the TRA group(n=637).The primary endpoint was the success rate of access puncture.Secondary endpoints included procedural efficiency,patient comfort,and complication rates.Baseline characteristics,procedural data,and outcomes were analyzed and compared between the two groups.Results The success rates for access puncture showed no significant statistical difference between the DRA and TRA groups.However,the DRA group required more puncture attempts.DRA showed significant advantages,including shorter hemostasis times,reduced access puncture and postprocedural pain,and lower incidences of radial artery occlusion(2.1%vs.6.1%,P=0.043)and hematoma(1.7%vs.5.2%,P=0.037).Conclusions DRA is a viable alternative to TRA for performing PCI,offering comparable success rates and procedural efficiency with improved patient comfort and reduced complications.