Comparative Patient Satisfaction in Coronary Percutaneous Interventions: A Dual Experience with Transradial and Transfemoral Access

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the preferences of patients who underwent both transradial access (TRA) and transfemoral access for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). The primary focus was on understanding patient preferences and satisfaction with each method to contribute insights into the choice of arterial access in coronary interventions. A single-center prospective study was conducted, including patients who had previously undergone either femoral or radial access for PCI and subsequently chose the alternative access for a second procedure. A comprehensive questionnaire with 13 inquiries was administered to 100 eligible patients, covering aspects such as procedural comfort, pain, embarrassment, and recovery time. The study received ethical approval, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. Among the 100 surveyed patients, all of whom had experienced both TRA and transfemoral access, a unanimous preference for TRA was observed. Patients reported TRA as less stressful, less embarrassing, and less painful both peri- and post-procedurally. Notably, 98% of participants indicated faster recovery and earlier feeding after TRA angiography. No major complications were reported, supporting the safety of TRA. The findings strongly advocate for transradial access as the preferred method for coronary interventions, emphasizing the importance of patient satisfaction in choosing arterial access. The study underscores TRA’s advantages in terms of patient comfort, recovery time, and overall preference, suggesting its incorporation as a routine method for PCI procedures.