Enrico Poletti, Giuseppe Colletti, Carlo Zivelonghi, Alice Benedetti, Alice Moroni, Hicham El Jattari, Alexandre Natalis, Francesca Rubino, Benjamin Scott, Elias Bentakhou, Steven E F Haine, Pierfrancesco Agostoni, Claudiu Ungureanu
{"title":"Intravascular Ultrasound Assessment of Distal Trans-Radial Access in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.","authors":"Enrico Poletti, Giuseppe Colletti, Carlo Zivelonghi, Alice Benedetti, Alice Moroni, Hicham El Jattari, Alexandre Natalis, Francesca Rubino, Benjamin Scott, Elias Bentakhou, Steven E F Haine, Pierfrancesco Agostoni, Claudiu Ungureanu","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Distal trans-radial access (dTRA) for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is increasingly gaining attention due to its potential to mitigate radial artery occlusion (RAO). However, a comprehensive understanding of the mechanical impact of the devices on the radial artery (RA) wall remains limited. Using a complete intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) evaluation of the RA, including also the vascular access site, we aimed to evaluate all the consequences related to the catheterization on the RA wall, starting from the vascular access, comparing conventional sheath and sheathless approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is an observational, prospective, multicenter study aimed to assess the entire RA wall immediately after IVUS-guided PCI via-dTRA. IVUS assessment included quantitative measurements (minimal lumen area [MLA], minimal vessel area [MVA]) and qualitative observations (dissections, vasospasm). Study objectives included delineating RA wall structure post-PCI and comparing findings between conventional and sheathless approaches.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty patients (21 [42%] with conventional sheath, 29 [58%] sheathless) were enrolled between March 2023 and February 2024. Female patients were more prevalent in the convention sheath group (38% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). Sheathless approach utilized 7-French guiding catheters more frequently (33% vs. 86%, p < 0.001). Post-procedural IVUS identified dissections in 12% of cases, with no significant difference between approaches. Arterial vasospasm was present in a quarter of patients, numerically higher in the conventional sheath group (29% vs. 21%, p = 0.5). MLA and MVA were comparable between groups, though MLA and MVA were lowest at the proximal segment of the RA only in the conventional sheath group (p < 0.001). No RAO was documented during the IVUS evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The intravascular assessment of dTRA after coronary interventions, utilizing either conventional or sheathless approaches, including large-bore guiding catheters, demonstrated a relatively low incidence of access-related complications such as dissection and vasospasm, without affecting the flow and patency of the proximal RA.</p>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31279","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Distal trans-radial access (dTRA) for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is increasingly gaining attention due to its potential to mitigate radial artery occlusion (RAO). However, a comprehensive understanding of the mechanical impact of the devices on the radial artery (RA) wall remains limited. Using a complete intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) evaluation of the RA, including also the vascular access site, we aimed to evaluate all the consequences related to the catheterization on the RA wall, starting from the vascular access, comparing conventional sheath and sheathless approaches.
Methods: This is an observational, prospective, multicenter study aimed to assess the entire RA wall immediately after IVUS-guided PCI via-dTRA. IVUS assessment included quantitative measurements (minimal lumen area [MLA], minimal vessel area [MVA]) and qualitative observations (dissections, vasospasm). Study objectives included delineating RA wall structure post-PCI and comparing findings between conventional and sheathless approaches.
Results: Fifty patients (21 [42%] with conventional sheath, 29 [58%] sheathless) were enrolled between March 2023 and February 2024. Female patients were more prevalent in the convention sheath group (38% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). Sheathless approach utilized 7-French guiding catheters more frequently (33% vs. 86%, p < 0.001). Post-procedural IVUS identified dissections in 12% of cases, with no significant difference between approaches. Arterial vasospasm was present in a quarter of patients, numerically higher in the conventional sheath group (29% vs. 21%, p = 0.5). MLA and MVA were comparable between groups, though MLA and MVA were lowest at the proximal segment of the RA only in the conventional sheath group (p < 0.001). No RAO was documented during the IVUS evaluation.
Conclusions: The intravascular assessment of dTRA after coronary interventions, utilizing either conventional or sheathless approaches, including large-bore guiding catheters, demonstrated a relatively low incidence of access-related complications such as dissection and vasospasm, without affecting the flow and patency of the proximal RA.
期刊介绍:
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.