Žurnal Grodnenskogo Gosudarstvennogo Medicinskogo Universiteta (Sep 2019)

COMPARISON OF STANDARD AND DISTAL RADIATED ACCESS IN CONDUCTING CORONAROGIOGRAPHY AND INTERTRACIAL CORONARY INTERVENTION

  • Chernyak A. A.,
  • Snezhitskiy V. A.,
  • Janushko A. V.,
  • Dzeshka M. S.,
  • Maksimchik A. V.,
  • Voronovich A. G,
  • Avdejchik S. V.,
  • Gabrijanchik G. P.,
  • Gadzhieva F. G.,
  • Ibrahimova D. S.

DOI
https://doi.org/10.25298/2221-8785-2019-17-4-468-473
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17, no. 4
pp. 468 – 473

Abstract

Read online

Objective. We aimed at assessing feasibility and safety of coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed via distal radial access. Material and methods. Two-stage study was designed. First, radial artery diameter was measured with duplex ultrasound at the conventional (proximal) access and anatomic snuffbox (distal access) in 160 patients, and diameter percentage change was calculated. The given minimal difference in radial artery diameter at two access points CAG or PCI via distal access was performed in 134 patients to address safety outcomes at the study stage 2. Results. Median inner diameter of the radial artery was 2.3 (2.0-2.6) mm at the conventional access point, and 2.05 (1.8-2.5) mm – at the distal one. No access-related adverse events were recorded within intervention or during follow-up. Conclusions. The use of distal radial access to perform CAG and PCI is anatomically feasible and safe.

Keywords