Comparison of fixed dose versus weight-adjusted heparin on the prevention of radial artery occlusion after diagnostic transradial catheterization.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Roberto da Silva, Rodrigo M Joaquim, Thaís R W da Silva, Felipe Borges Oliveira, Pedro B de Andrade, José Ribamar Costa
{"title":"Comparison of fixed dose versus weight-adjusted heparin on the prevention of radial artery occlusion after diagnostic transradial catheterization.","authors":"Roberto da Silva, Rodrigo M Joaquim, Thaís R W da Silva, Felipe Borges Oliveira, Pedro B de Andrade, José Ribamar Costa","doi":"10.25270/jic/24.00357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Transradial access (TRA) catheterization has demonstrated significant reductions in procedural complications compared with other access routes. However, radial artery occlusion (RAO) remains a concern, and the optimal dose of heparin to mitigate RAO has yet to be determined. This study aims to address this gap by investigating the impact of weight-adjusted heparin doses on the incidence of RAO in patients undergoing diagnostic transradial catheterization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study is a subanalysis of a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating heparin dosing strategies in 1494 patients undergoing diagnostic transradial catheterization. All participants received a standard fixed dose of 5000 IU of heparin at the start of the procedure, with additional analyses stratifying patients by weight-adjusted heparin doses. RAO was assessed using Doppler ultrasound within 12 hours post-procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients were grouped by weight-adjusted heparin quartiles: less than 58.14 IU/kg (Quartile 1), 58.14 to 65.79 IU/kg (Quartile 2), 65.79 to 74.63 IU/kg (Quartile 3), and greater than 74.63 IU/kg (Quartile 4). The incidence of RAO was similar across groups (2.1%, 2.6%, 2.8%, and 3.0%, respectively; P = .86). Comparisons of extreme dosages (less than 50 IU/kg vs greater than 80 IU/kg) also revealed no significant differences (1.9% vs 2.5%; P = .71). No major bleeding events were reported, and hematoma rates were consistent across groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Heparin doses adjusted by weight did not significantly influence the incidence of RAO when a baseline dose of 5000 IU was maintained. These findings reinforce the safety and efficacy of using 5000 IU heparin during diagnostic TRA procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":49261,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Invasive Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Invasive Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25270/jic/24.00357","RegionNum":4,"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

Objectives: Transradial access (TRA) catheterization has demonstrated significant reductions in procedural complications compared with other access routes. However, radial artery occlusion (RAO) remains a concern, and the optimal dose of heparin to mitigate RAO has yet to be determined. This study aims to address this gap by investigating the impact of weight-adjusted heparin doses on the incidence of RAO in patients undergoing diagnostic transradial catheterization.

Methods: This study is a subanalysis of a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating heparin dosing strategies in 1494 patients undergoing diagnostic transradial catheterization. All participants received a standard fixed dose of 5000 IU of heparin at the start of the procedure, with additional analyses stratifying patients by weight-adjusted heparin doses. RAO was assessed using Doppler ultrasound within 12 hours post-procedure.

Results: Patients were grouped by weight-adjusted heparin quartiles: less than 58.14 IU/kg (Quartile 1), 58.14 to 65.79 IU/kg (Quartile 2), 65.79 to 74.63 IU/kg (Quartile 3), and greater than 74.63 IU/kg (Quartile 4). The incidence of RAO was similar across groups (2.1%, 2.6%, 2.8%, and 3.0%, respectively; P = .86). Comparisons of extreme dosages (less than 50 IU/kg vs greater than 80 IU/kg) also revealed no significant differences (1.9% vs 2.5%; P = .71). No major bleeding events were reported, and hematoma rates were consistent across groups.

Conclusions: Heparin doses adjusted by weight did not significantly influence the incidence of RAO when a baseline dose of 5000 IU was maintained. These findings reinforce the safety and efficacy of using 5000 IU heparin during diagnostic TRA procedures.

固定剂量肝素与体重调节肝素预防诊断性桡动脉置管后桡动脉闭塞的比较。
目的:与其他通路相比,经桡动脉通路(TRA)导管置入已证明可显著减少手术并发症。然而,桡动脉闭塞(RAO)仍然是一个问题,肝素缓解RAO的最佳剂量尚未确定。本研究旨在通过研究体重调整肝素剂量对诊断性经桡动脉置管患者RAO发生率的影响来解决这一空白。方法:本研究是一项多中心、前瞻性、随机试验的亚分析,该试验评估了1494例接受诊断性经桡动脉导管置管的患者的肝素给药策略。所有参与者在手术开始时接受标准固定剂量的5000 IU肝素,并通过体重调整肝素剂量对患者进行额外的分析。术后12小时内用多普勒超声评估RAO。结果:患者按体重调整肝素四分位数分组:低于58.14 IU/kg(四分位数1)、58.14至65.79 IU/kg(四分位数2)、65.79至74.63 IU/kg(四分位数3)和大于74.63 IU/kg(四分位数4)。各组间RAO发生率相似(分别为2.1%、2.6%、2.8%和3.0%;P = .86)。比较极端剂量(小于50 IU/kg vs大于80 IU/kg)也显示无显著差异(1.9% vs 2.5%;P = .71)。无大出血事件报告,各组血肿率一致。结论:当维持5000 IU的基线剂量时,按体重调整的肝素剂量对RAO的发生率没有显著影响。这些发现加强了在TRA诊断过程中使用5000 IU肝素的安全性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Invasive Cardiology
Journal of Invasive Cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
214
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Invasive Cardiology will consider for publication suitable articles on topics pertaining to the invasive treatment of patients with cardiovascular disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信