Transradial versus transfemoral arterial access in the uterine artery embolization of fibroids.

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Abheek Ghosh, Tanvir Agnihotri, Vikash Gupta, Palak Sitwala, Monica Stanley, Stephen Cai, Nabeel Mohsin Akhter
{"title":"Transradial versus transfemoral arterial access in the uterine artery embolization of fibroids.","authors":"Abheek Ghosh,&nbsp;Tanvir Agnihotri,&nbsp;Vikash Gupta,&nbsp;Palak Sitwala,&nbsp;Monica Stanley,&nbsp;Stephen Cai,&nbsp;Nabeel Mohsin Akhter","doi":"10.5114/pjr.2022.123790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Transradial arterial access has become more popular in body interventional procedures but has not been ubiquitously adapted. This retrospective study assesses the efficacy of this approach in uterine artery embolization. Aim of the study was to compare transradial to transfemoral arterial access in patients undergoing uterine artery embolization for the treatment of fibroids.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A total of 172 patients underwent uterine artery embolization procedures at our institute from October 2014 to June 2020. Of these, 76 patients had their operations performed via transfemoral access while 96 underwent transradial access. The peak radiation dose, fluoroscopy time, procedure time, total contrast volume, and equipment cost for each procedure were all reviewed to evaluate for statistical differences between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All cases were technically successful without major complications. The average peak skin dose was 2281 mGy,with no statistical difference between the transradial or transfemoral cohorts. Average fluoroscopy time was 25 minutes, also with no statistical difference between the subsets. Mean procedure time was 100 min, and mean contrast volume usage was 138 mL with no statistical differences. Similarly, the average equipment cost was $2204, with no significant differences found between transradial and transfemoral access.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With respect to many pertinent radiation parameters, transradial access was evaluated as being an equally efficacious alternative to transfemoral access in uterine artery embolization procedures. The results of this study suggest that transradial access should be considered more often, whenever viable, as an option in the uterine artery embolization treatment of fibroids.</p>","PeriodicalId":47128,"journal":{"name":"Polish Journal of Radiology","volume":"87 ","pages":"e672-e677"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2b/10/PJR-87-49782.PMC9834067.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2022.123790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Transradial arterial access has become more popular in body interventional procedures but has not been ubiquitously adapted. This retrospective study assesses the efficacy of this approach in uterine artery embolization. Aim of the study was to compare transradial to transfemoral arterial access in patients undergoing uterine artery embolization for the treatment of fibroids.

Material and methods: A total of 172 patients underwent uterine artery embolization procedures at our institute from October 2014 to June 2020. Of these, 76 patients had their operations performed via transfemoral access while 96 underwent transradial access. The peak radiation dose, fluoroscopy time, procedure time, total contrast volume, and equipment cost for each procedure were all reviewed to evaluate for statistical differences between the 2 groups.

Results: All cases were technically successful without major complications. The average peak skin dose was 2281 mGy,with no statistical difference between the transradial or transfemoral cohorts. Average fluoroscopy time was 25 minutes, also with no statistical difference between the subsets. Mean procedure time was 100 min, and mean contrast volume usage was 138 mL with no statistical differences. Similarly, the average equipment cost was $2204, with no significant differences found between transradial and transfemoral access.

Conclusions: With respect to many pertinent radiation parameters, transradial access was evaluated as being an equally efficacious alternative to transfemoral access in uterine artery embolization procedures. The results of this study suggest that transradial access should be considered more often, whenever viable, as an option in the uterine artery embolization treatment of fibroids.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

子宫肌瘤动脉栓塞术中经桡动脉与经股动脉的对比。
目的:经桡动脉入路在身体介入手术中越来越流行,但尚未被普遍采用。本回顾性研究评估该入路在子宫动脉栓塞中的疗效。本研究的目的是比较经桡动脉和经股动脉在子宫动脉栓塞治疗肌瘤患者中的应用。材料与方法:2014年10月至2020年6月,我院172例患者行子宫动脉栓塞术。其中76例患者经股动脉入路手术,96例经桡动脉入路手术。评估两组患者的峰值辐射剂量、x线透视时间、手术时间、总造影剂体积和设备成本,比较两组患者的差异。结果:所有病例均技术成功,无重大并发症。平均峰值皮肤剂量为2281 mGy,经桡动脉组和经股动脉组之间无统计学差异。平均透视时间为25分钟,各组间也无统计学差异。平均手术时间为100 min,平均造影剂用量为138 mL,两组间无统计学差异。同样,平均设备成本为2204美元,经桡动脉和经股动脉通路之间没有显著差异。结论:在许多相关的放射参数方面,经桡骨通路被评估为子宫动脉栓塞手术中与经股通路同样有效的替代方法。本研究的结果表明,在子宫动脉栓塞治疗肌瘤时,只要可行,应更多地考虑经桡动脉通路。
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
Polish Journal of Radiology
Polish Journal of Radiology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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