CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Genetics and Causality of Triglyceride-Rich Lipoproteins in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Last nail in the coffin for PCI in stable angina? Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC /SCAI Consensus Statement Comparison of Benefit of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Patients With Versus Without Reduced (≤40%) Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Comparative analysis of recurrent events after presentation with an index myocardial infarction or ischaemic stroke Implantable Hemodynamic Monitoring for Heart Failure Patients Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Evolocumab in High-Risk Patients Receiving a Statin: Secondary Analysis of Patients With Low LDL Cholesterol Levels and in Those Already Receiving a Maximal-Potency Statin in a Randomized Clinical Trial Non-invasive detection of coronary inflammation using computed tomography and prediction of residual cardiovascular risk (the CRISP CT study): a post-hoc analysis of prospective outcome data

Clinical TrialMay 2018 [Epub ahead]

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Incidence, Determinants, and Outcomes of Left and Right Radial Access Use in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United Kingdom-A National Perspective Using the BCIS Dataset

M Rashid, C Lawson, J Potts et al. Keywords: 30-day mortality; in-hospital mortality; in-hospital; strokeleft radial accessMACEmajor adverse cardiovascular events; major bleeding; right radial access; successive PCI

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The authors sought to determine the relationships between left radial access (LRA) or right radial access (RRA) and clinical outcomes using the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS) database.


BACKGROUND - LRA has been shown to offer procedural advantages over RRA in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) although few data exist from a national perspective around its use and association with clinical outcomes.

METHODS - The authors investigated the relationship between use of LRA or RRA and clinical outcomes of in-hospital or 30-day mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, in-hospital stroke, and major bleeding complications in patients undergoing PCI between 2007 and 2014.

RESULTS - Of 342,806 cases identified, 328,495 (96%) were RRA and 14,311 (4%) were LRA. Use of LRA increased from 3.2% to 4.6% from 2007 to 2014. In patients undergoing a repeat PCI procedure, the use of RRA dropped to 72% at the second procedure and was even lower in females (65%) and patients >75 years of age (70%). Use of LRA (compared with RRA) was not associated with significant differences in in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90 to 1.57; p = 0.20), 30-day mortality (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.74; p = 0.16), MACE (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.32; p = 0.56), or major bleeding (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.77; p = 0.24). In propensity match analysis, LRA was associated with a significant decrease in in-hospital stroke (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.82; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS - In this large PCI database, use of LRA is limited compared with RRA but conveys no increased risk of adverse outcomes, but may be associated with a reduction in PCI-related stroke complications.