{"title":"Antecubital versus femoral approach for adrenal venous sampling in the patients with primary aldosteronism: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Hui Dong, Hongwu Li, Yujie Zuo, Kaiwen Jiang, Wentao Ma, Yubao Zou, Wenjun Ma, Xiongjing Jiang","doi":"10.1097/JS9.0000000000002452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Femoral vein access used to be the traditional approach for adrenal venous sampling (AVS) procedures, whereas antecubital vein access is the newly developed approach. Until now, no randomized trial for comparison of two approaches has been carried out.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the success rate, safety, and procedural parameters of AVS via an antecubital approach versus femoral approach.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This randomized clinical trial (RCT) was conducted between January 2022 and December 2023. The patients with primary aldosteronism (PA) aged 18-60 years were randomly assigned to femoral vein access group (FV) or antecubital vein access group (AV). The intention-to-treat analysis included all randomized patients.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 675 patients aged 18-60 years old with hypertension that were at increased risk for PA were screened, 183 of whom were confirmed with PA. Twenty-nine patients were excluded due to refusal of AVS, decline of participating in this trial, or contraindication to AVS. A total of 154 patients recruited in this trial.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Patients were randomly assigned to undergo AVS via femoral approach or antecubital approach.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary end point was the success rate of bilateral AVS. Secondary end points included the success rate of right, left sampling, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, incidence of complications, and postsurgical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From January 2022 to December 2023, totally 154 patients with PA were randomized to FV group (77cases, mean age, 47.8 ± 8.1 years; 26 females [33.8%]) and AV group (77cases, mean age, 49.2 ± 8.6 years; 30 females [39%]). The baseline characteristics for the two groups were well balanced (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in the success rate of bilateral (89.6% vs 92.2%, P = 0.58),right (94.8% vs 97.4%, P = 0.68), and left (94.8% vs 94.8%, P = 1.00) sampling between two groups. The incidence of complications did not differ between the two groups (2.6% vs 1.3%, P = 1.00). The incidence of arterial mis-puncture was significantly higher in FV group than that in AV group (0% vs 9.1%, P = 0.02). The fluoroscopy time and contrast volume did not significantly differ between two groups. The procedure duration in AV group was significantly shorter than that of FV group (18.0 [IQR, 15.0-23.0] versus 20.0 [IQR, 17.0-25.5], P = 0.011). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who achieved complete clinical success (50.0% vs 45.9%, P = 0.725) and complete biochemical success (92.1% vs 91.9%, P = 1.000) after adrenalectomy between FV group and AV group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>The trial showed AVS via AV approach or FV approach did not lead to significant differences in success rate and incidence of complications, as well as postsurgical outcomes. However, AV approach was associated with shorter procedure duration, no arterial mis-puncture and earlier ambulation after the procedure, which make it a better alternative to FV approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":14401,"journal":{"name":"International journal of surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000002452","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Importance: Femoral vein access used to be the traditional approach for adrenal venous sampling (AVS) procedures, whereas antecubital vein access is the newly developed approach. Until now, no randomized trial for comparison of two approaches has been carried out.
Objective: To compare the success rate, safety, and procedural parameters of AVS via an antecubital approach versus femoral approach.
Design: This randomized clinical trial (RCT) was conducted between January 2022 and December 2023. The patients with primary aldosteronism (PA) aged 18-60 years were randomly assigned to femoral vein access group (FV) or antecubital vein access group (AV). The intention-to-treat analysis included all randomized patients.
Participants: A total of 675 patients aged 18-60 years old with hypertension that were at increased risk for PA were screened, 183 of whom were confirmed with PA. Twenty-nine patients were excluded due to refusal of AVS, decline of participating in this trial, or contraindication to AVS. A total of 154 patients recruited in this trial.
Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to undergo AVS via femoral approach or antecubital approach.
Main outcomes and measures: The primary end point was the success rate of bilateral AVS. Secondary end points included the success rate of right, left sampling, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, incidence of complications, and postsurgical outcomes.
Results: From January 2022 to December 2023, totally 154 patients with PA were randomized to FV group (77cases, mean age, 47.8 ± 8.1 years; 26 females [33.8%]) and AV group (77cases, mean age, 49.2 ± 8.6 years; 30 females [39%]). The baseline characteristics for the two groups were well balanced (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in the success rate of bilateral (89.6% vs 92.2%, P = 0.58),right (94.8% vs 97.4%, P = 0.68), and left (94.8% vs 94.8%, P = 1.00) sampling between two groups. The incidence of complications did not differ between the two groups (2.6% vs 1.3%, P = 1.00). The incidence of arterial mis-puncture was significantly higher in FV group than that in AV group (0% vs 9.1%, P = 0.02). The fluoroscopy time and contrast volume did not significantly differ between two groups. The procedure duration in AV group was significantly shorter than that of FV group (18.0 [IQR, 15.0-23.0] versus 20.0 [IQR, 17.0-25.5], P = 0.011). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who achieved complete clinical success (50.0% vs 45.9%, P = 0.725) and complete biochemical success (92.1% vs 91.9%, P = 1.000) after adrenalectomy between FV group and AV group.
Conclusion and relevance: The trial showed AVS via AV approach or FV approach did not lead to significant differences in success rate and incidence of complications, as well as postsurgical outcomes. However, AV approach was associated with shorter procedure duration, no arterial mis-puncture and earlier ambulation after the procedure, which make it a better alternative to FV approach.
重要性:股静脉入路曾经是肾上腺静脉采样(AVS)的传统入路,而肘前静脉入路是新发展的入路。到目前为止,还没有进行两种方法比较的随机试验。目的:比较经肘前入路与股骨入路AVS的成功率、安全性和手术参数。设计:该随机临床试验(RCT)于2022年1月至2023年12月进行。将18 ~ 60岁原发性醛固酮增多症(PA)患者随机分为股静脉(FV)组和胫前静脉(AV)组。意向治疗分析包括所有随机患者。参与者:共筛查了675名年龄在18-60岁的高血压患者,这些患者患PA的风险增加,其中183人被证实患有PA。29例患者因拒绝AVS、拒绝参加本试验或AVS禁忌症而被排除。该试验共招募了154名患者。干预:患者被随机分配到经股骨入路或经肘前入路行AVS。主要观察指标:以双侧AVS成功率为主要观察终点。次要终点包括右、左取样成功率、手术时间、透视时间、造影剂体积、并发症发生率和术后结果。结果:2022年1月至2023年12月,共154例PA患者随机分为FV组(77例,平均年龄47.8±8.1岁;女性26例(33.8%),AV组77例,平均年龄49.2±8.6岁;30名女性[39%])。两组患者的基线特征比较平衡(P < 0.05)。两组患者双侧(89.6% vs 92.2%, P = 0.58)、右侧(94.8% vs 97.4%, P = 0.68)、左侧(94.8% vs 94.8%, P = 1.00)取样成功率差异均无统计学意义。两组的并发症发生率无差异(2.6% vs 1.3%, P = 1.00)。FV组动脉穿刺错误发生率明显高于AV组(0% vs 9.1%, P = 0.02)。两组透视时间和造影剂体积无显著性差异。AV组手术时间明显短于FV组(18.0 [IQR, 15.0 ~ 23.0] vs . 20.0 [IQR, 17.0 ~ 25.5], P = 0.011)。FV组与AV组肾上腺切除术后临床完全成功比例(50.0% vs 45.9%, P = 0.725)和生化完全成功比例(92.1% vs 91.9%, P = 1.000)差异无统计学意义。结论及相关性:本试验显示经AV入路与FV入路行AVS在成功率、并发症发生率及术后结局上均无显著差异。然而,AV入路手术时间较短,无动脉穿刺错误,术后活动时间较早,使其成为FV入路的更好选择。
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Surgery (IJS) has a broad scope, encompassing all surgical specialties. Its primary objective is to facilitate the exchange of crucial ideas and lines of thought between and across these specialties.By doing so, the journal aims to counter the growing trend of increasing sub-specialization, which can result in "tunnel-vision" and the isolation of significant surgical advancements within specific specialties.