Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Background: Primary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with transradial access (TRA) are associated with the risk of local complications, such as occlusion of the radial artery (ORA), hematomas, pseudoaneurysms, and arteriovenous fistulas. Aim: To perform c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ruslan V. Akhramovich, Sergey P. Semitko, Alexey V. Azarov, Anton I. Analeev, Ilya S. Melnichenko, Irina E. Chernysheva, Andrey A. Tretyakov, David G. Iosseliani
Format: Article
Language:Russian
Published: MONIKI 2022-11-01
Series:Alʹmanah Kliničeskoj Mediciny
Subjects:
Online Access:https://almclinmed.ru/jour/article/viewFile/1704/1485
_version_ 1811190903687086080
author Ruslan V. Akhramovich
Sergey P. Semitko
Alexey V. Azarov
Anton I. Analeev
Ilya S. Melnichenko
Irina E. Chernysheva
Andrey A. Tretyakov
David G. Iosseliani
author_facet Ruslan V. Akhramovich
Sergey P. Semitko
Alexey V. Azarov
Anton I. Analeev
Ilya S. Melnichenko
Irina E. Chernysheva
Andrey A. Tretyakov
David G. Iosseliani
author_sort Ruslan V. Akhramovich
collection DOAJ
description Background: Primary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with transradial access (TRA) are associated with the risk of local complications, such as occlusion of the radial artery (ORA), hematomas, pseudoaneurysms, and arteriovenous fistulas. Aim: To perform comparative assessment of clinical efficacy and safety of the TRA and dorsopalmar (modified distal) radial access (DpRA) for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in in-patients with ACS. Materials and methods: This was a randomized, dynamic, single-center, prospective study in two parallel groups. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups with different types of the radiation access: TRA (n = 100) or DpRA (n = 100). TRA was made at the distal third of the forearm and DpRA on the dorsal palm surface. After the access zone was evaluated by angiography, the pressure bandage was placed on the zone for 6 hours for hemostasis. The comfort of hemostasis was assessed by the Gaston-Johansson 10-point verbal-descriptive pain rating scale. On the 57th day after PCI, all patients were examined with palpation and ultrasound assessment of the access artery. Results: The number of attempts, average duration of the radial artery puncture, duration of the fluoroscopy procedure, and the conversion rate did not depend on the access type. The scoring of the subjective hemostasis comfort showed a significant advantage of DpRA over TRA (6.4 [4; 10] in the TRA group vs 1.7 [0; 6] in the DpRA group, p 0.001). The rate of EASY III hematomas was 15 (15%) in the TRA group vs 3 (3%) in the DpRA group (p = 0.004). There were no EASY IVV hematomas, occlusion of the radial artery of the forearm, pseudoaneurysms and arteriovenous fistulas in the DpRA group. The diameter of the forearm radial artery was significantly larger than the diameter on the dorsal palm surface in the patients of both groups, regardless of the type of access chosen (2.75 0.32 mm and 2.38 0.36 mm in the TRA group, p 0.001; 2.84 0.38 mm and 2.45 0.36 mm in the DpRA group, p 0.001). In the patients with access conversion in both groups, the diameter of the radial artery at both levels was less than the average one. Conclusion: DpRA for PCI in ACS patients is a safe alternative to conventional radiation access. Ultrasound examination of the radial artery diameter in its distal and forearm parts before PCI could reduce the conversion rate.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T14:58:07Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4602fed302fc472d8796b83325881703
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2072-0505
2587-9294
language Russian
last_indexed 2024-04-11T14:58:07Z
publishDate 2022-11-01
publisher MONIKI
record_format Article
series Alʹmanah Kliničeskoj Mediciny
spelling doaj.art-4602fed302fc472d8796b833258817032022-12-22T04:17:06ZrusMONIKIAlʹmanah Kliničeskoj Mediciny2072-05052587-92942022-11-0150424525410.18786/2072-0505-2022-50-034887Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndromeRuslan V. Akhramovich0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0026-6998Sergey P. Semitko1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1268-5145Alexey V. Azarov2https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7061-337XAnton I. Analeev3https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8500-5569Ilya S. Melnichenko4https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3081-7201Irina E. Chernysheva5https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9707-0691Andrey A. Tretyakov6David G. Iosseliani7https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6425-7428Mytischi City Clinical HospitalScientific and Practical Center for Interventional Cardioangiology of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityScientific and Practical Center for Interventional Cardioangiology of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityMytischi City Clinical HospitalMytischi City Clinical HospitalScientific and Practical Center for Interventional Cardioangiology of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityMytischi City Clinical HospitalScientific and Practical Center for Interventional Cardioangiology of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical UniversityBackground: Primary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with transradial access (TRA) are associated with the risk of local complications, such as occlusion of the radial artery (ORA), hematomas, pseudoaneurysms, and arteriovenous fistulas. Aim: To perform comparative assessment of clinical efficacy and safety of the TRA and dorsopalmar (modified distal) radial access (DpRA) for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in in-patients with ACS. Materials and methods: This was a randomized, dynamic, single-center, prospective study in two parallel groups. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups with different types of the radiation access: TRA (n = 100) or DpRA (n = 100). TRA was made at the distal third of the forearm and DpRA on the dorsal palm surface. After the access zone was evaluated by angiography, the pressure bandage was placed on the zone for 6 hours for hemostasis. The comfort of hemostasis was assessed by the Gaston-Johansson 10-point verbal-descriptive pain rating scale. On the 57th day after PCI, all patients were examined with palpation and ultrasound assessment of the access artery. Results: The number of attempts, average duration of the radial artery puncture, duration of the fluoroscopy procedure, and the conversion rate did not depend on the access type. The scoring of the subjective hemostasis comfort showed a significant advantage of DpRA over TRA (6.4 [4; 10] in the TRA group vs 1.7 [0; 6] in the DpRA group, p 0.001). The rate of EASY III hematomas was 15 (15%) in the TRA group vs 3 (3%) in the DpRA group (p = 0.004). There were no EASY IVV hematomas, occlusion of the radial artery of the forearm, pseudoaneurysms and arteriovenous fistulas in the DpRA group. The diameter of the forearm radial artery was significantly larger than the diameter on the dorsal palm surface in the patients of both groups, regardless of the type of access chosen (2.75 0.32 mm and 2.38 0.36 mm in the TRA group, p 0.001; 2.84 0.38 mm and 2.45 0.36 mm in the DpRA group, p 0.001). In the patients with access conversion in both groups, the diameter of the radial artery at both levels was less than the average one. Conclusion: DpRA for PCI in ACS patients is a safe alternative to conventional radiation access. Ultrasound examination of the radial artery diameter in its distal and forearm parts before PCI could reduce the conversion rate.https://almclinmed.ru/jour/article/viewFile/1704/1485distal radial accesspercutaneous coronary interventionacute coronary syndrome
spellingShingle Ruslan V. Akhramovich
Sergey P. Semitko
Alexey V. Azarov
Anton I. Analeev
Ilya S. Melnichenko
Irina E. Chernysheva
Andrey A. Tretyakov
David G. Iosseliani
Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
Alʹmanah Kliničeskoj Mediciny
distal radial access
percutaneous coronary intervention
acute coronary syndrome
title Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
title_full Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
title_short Comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar (modified distal) and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
title_sort comparative analysis of the dorsopalmar modified distal and transradial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute coronary syndrome
topic distal radial access
percutaneous coronary intervention
acute coronary syndrome
url https://almclinmed.ru/jour/article/viewFile/1704/1485
work_keys_str_mv AT ruslanvakhramovich comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT sergeypsemitko comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT alexeyvazarov comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT antonianaleev comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT ilyasmelnichenko comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT irinaechernysheva comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT andreyatretyakov comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome
AT davidgiosseliani comparativeanalysisofthedorsopalmarmodifieddistalandtransradialaccessinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionsinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndrome