A transradial approach directly using a distal access catheter for symptomatic intracranial vertebral artery and basilar artery stenosis: A single-center study

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Tao Peng , Hao Tian , Bifeng Zhu , Jianlin Liu , Lei Zhang , Yu Xie , Bitang Dan
{"title":"A transradial approach directly using a distal access catheter for symptomatic intracranial vertebral artery and basilar artery stenosis: A single-center study","authors":"Tao Peng ,&nbsp;Hao Tian ,&nbsp;Bifeng Zhu ,&nbsp;Jianlin Liu ,&nbsp;Lei Zhang ,&nbsp;Yu Xie ,&nbsp;Bitang Dan","doi":"10.1016/j.clineuro.2025.109154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study primarily reports our single-center experience and technical procedures involving the direct use of a distal access catheter (DAC) via the transradial approach (TRA) for treating symptomatic intracranial vertebral (VA) and basilar (BA) artery stenosis and to evaluate factors influencing the success rate of establishing a TRA.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 62 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for symptomatic intracranial VA and BA stenosis between June 2021 and March 2023. Patients were divided into TRA and transfemoral approach (TFA) groups. Patient characteristics and radiographic and clinical information were reviewed. In the TRA group, subgroup analysis was performed based on whether the DAC was shaped to compare the significant differences between the two groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There were no significant differences in procedural success rates or complication rates between the two groups. However, the proportion of smokers and the rate of access catheter use were higher in the TRA group than in the TFA group. The VA take-off angle was also greater in the TRA group. The TRA subgroup analysis showed that the VA take-off angle of the subgroup whose DACs did not require shaping was greater (109.57 ± 28.63° vs. 62.8 ± 21.57°, p &lt; 0.001), and the subclavian artery height was shorter (6.13 ± 4.31 mm vs. 13.58 ± 7.35 mm, p = 0.002). The VA take-off angle and subclavian artery height cutoff values were 68.7° and 8.64 mm, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study reveals that directly using a DAC via the TRA without guiding support is safe and effective for treating symptomatic intracranial VA and BA stenosis. A higher success rate of TRA can be achieved when the VA take-off angle is greater than 68.7° and the ipsilateral subclavian artery height is less than 8.64 mm.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10385,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery","volume":"258 ","pages":"Article 109154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0303846725004378","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study primarily reports our single-center experience and technical procedures involving the direct use of a distal access catheter (DAC) via the transradial approach (TRA) for treating symptomatic intracranial vertebral (VA) and basilar (BA) artery stenosis and to evaluate factors influencing the success rate of establishing a TRA.

Method

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 62 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for symptomatic intracranial VA and BA stenosis between June 2021 and March 2023. Patients were divided into TRA and transfemoral approach (TFA) groups. Patient characteristics and radiographic and clinical information were reviewed. In the TRA group, subgroup analysis was performed based on whether the DAC was shaped to compare the significant differences between the two groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in procedural success rates or complication rates between the two groups. However, the proportion of smokers and the rate of access catheter use were higher in the TRA group than in the TFA group. The VA take-off angle was also greater in the TRA group. The TRA subgroup analysis showed that the VA take-off angle of the subgroup whose DACs did not require shaping was greater (109.57 ± 28.63° vs. 62.8 ± 21.57°, p < 0.001), and the subclavian artery height was shorter (6.13 ± 4.31 mm vs. 13.58 ± 7.35 mm, p = 0.002). The VA take-off angle and subclavian artery height cutoff values were 68.7° and 8.64 mm, respectively.

Conclusions

This study reveals that directly using a DAC via the TRA without guiding support is safe and effective for treating symptomatic intracranial VA and BA stenosis. A higher success rate of TRA can be achieved when the VA take-off angle is greater than 68.7° and the ipsilateral subclavian artery height is less than 8.64 mm.
经桡骨入路直接使用远端导管治疗症状性颅内椎动脉和基底动脉狭窄:一项单中心研究。
目的:本研究主要报道我们的单中心经验和技术流程,包括直接使用远端通路导管(DAC)经桡动脉入路(TRA)治疗症状性颅内椎动脉(VA)和基底动脉(BA)狭窄,并评估影响建立TRA成功率的因素。方法:回顾性分析2021年6月至2023年3月62例经血管内治疗的症状性颅内VA和BA狭窄患者。患者分为经TRA组和经股入路(TFA)组。回顾了患者的特征、影像学和临床资料。在TRA组中,根据DAC是否成型进行亚组分析,以比较两组之间的显著差异。结果:两组手术成功率及并发症发生率无明显差异。然而,TRA组吸烟者的比例和导管使用率高于TFA组。TRA组的VA起飞角度也更大。TRA亚组分析显示,不需要整形的DAC亚组的VA起跳角更大(109.57 ± 28.63°vs. 62.8 ± 21.57°,p )。结论:本研究表明,直接通过TRA使用DAC治疗症状性颅内VA和BA狭窄是安全有效的。当VA起飞角度大于68.7°,同侧锁骨下动脉高度小于8.64 mm时,TRA成功率较高。
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
Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery
Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
358
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery is devoted to publishing papers and reports on the clinical aspects of neurology and neurosurgery. It is an international forum for papers of high scientific standard that are of interest to Neurologists and Neurosurgeons world-wide.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信