Khawaja M Talha, Eisha Waqar, Kellan E Ashley, Mauricio G Cohen, Alejandro Lemor, Michael R McMullan, John G Winscott, Gabriel A Hernandez
{"title":"冠状动脉介入治疗中远端桡动脉通路与传统桡动脉通路的比较:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Khawaja M Talha, Eisha Waqar, Kellan E Ashley, Mauricio G Cohen, Alejandro Lemor, Michael R McMullan, John G Winscott, Gabriel A Hernandez","doi":"10.1097/HPC.0000000000000304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Distal trans-radial access (dTRA) is a novel technique of arterial cannulation in coronary interventions. The comparative efficacy of dTRA and conventional trans-radial access (TRA) in attenuating peri-procedural complications is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Embase and PubMed/MEDLINE were searched from their inception until June 25, 2022, for randomized clinical trials. Outcomes included were radial artery occlusion (RAO), radial artery spasm, hemostasis time, access time, unsuccessful cannulation, crossover rate, and early discharge after trans-radial stenting of coronary arteries (EASY) type I-III hematomas. Statistical analysis was conducted using the random effects model to derive risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6 randomized clinical trials comprising 3240 patients were included. Subjects were predominantly male (73%) and had a mean age of 66 years. The dTRA group had a lower risk of RAO [RR 0.43 (95% CI, 0.26-0.69); P = 0.0005; I 2 = 0%] and had a shorter hemostasis time [MD -22.85 min (95% CI, -39.06 to -6.65); P = 0.006; I 2 = 99%]. The dTRA group had a higher crossover rate [RR 3.04 (95% CI, 1.88-4.91); P = 0.00001; I 2 = 56%] and a longer access time [MD 0.68 min (95% CI, 0.17-1.18); P = 0.009; I 2 = 99%]. The TRA group had a lower rate of unsuccessful cannulation [RR 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.95); P = 0.01; I 2 = 92%]. There was no significant difference between the groups for radial artery spasm and EASY type I-III hematomas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>dTRA is a safe alternative to conventional TRA for coronary interventions with a lower risk of RAO. Future trials are required to further compare both approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":35914,"journal":{"name":"Critical Pathways in Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distal Trans-radial Access Compared to Conventional Trans-radial Access in Coronary Interventions: A Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Khawaja M Talha, Eisha Waqar, Kellan E Ashley, Mauricio G Cohen, Alejandro Lemor, Michael R McMullan, John G Winscott, Gabriel A Hernandez\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HPC.0000000000000304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Distal trans-radial access (dTRA) is a novel technique of arterial cannulation in coronary interventions. The comparative efficacy of dTRA and conventional trans-radial access (TRA) in attenuating peri-procedural complications is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Embase and PubMed/MEDLINE were searched from their inception until June 25, 2022, for randomized clinical trials. Outcomes included were radial artery occlusion (RAO), radial artery spasm, hemostasis time, access time, unsuccessful cannulation, crossover rate, and early discharge after trans-radial stenting of coronary arteries (EASY) type I-III hematomas. Statistical analysis was conducted using the random effects model to derive risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6 randomized clinical trials comprising 3240 patients were included. Subjects were predominantly male (73%) and had a mean age of 66 years. The dTRA group had a lower risk of RAO [RR 0.43 (95% CI, 0.26-0.69); P = 0.0005; I 2 = 0%] and had a shorter hemostasis time [MD -22.85 min (95% CI, -39.06 to -6.65); P = 0.006; I 2 = 99%]. The dTRA group had a higher crossover rate [RR 3.04 (95% CI, 1.88-4.91); P = 0.00001; I 2 = 56%] and a longer access time [MD 0.68 min (95% CI, 0.17-1.18); P = 0.009; I 2 = 99%]. The TRA group had a lower rate of unsuccessful cannulation [RR 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.95); P = 0.01; I 2 = 92%]. There was no significant difference between the groups for radial artery spasm and EASY type I-III hematomas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>dTRA is a safe alternative to conventional TRA for coronary interventions with a lower risk of RAO. Future trials are required to further compare both approaches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Pathways in Cardiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Pathways in Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HPC.0000000000000304\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Pathways in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HPC.0000000000000304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Distal Trans-radial Access Compared to Conventional Trans-radial Access in Coronary Interventions: A Meta-analysis.
Background: Distal trans-radial access (dTRA) is a novel technique of arterial cannulation in coronary interventions. The comparative efficacy of dTRA and conventional trans-radial access (TRA) in attenuating peri-procedural complications is unknown.
Methods: Embase and PubMed/MEDLINE were searched from their inception until June 25, 2022, for randomized clinical trials. Outcomes included were radial artery occlusion (RAO), radial artery spasm, hemostasis time, access time, unsuccessful cannulation, crossover rate, and early discharge after trans-radial stenting of coronary arteries (EASY) type I-III hematomas. Statistical analysis was conducted using the random effects model to derive risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: A total of 6 randomized clinical trials comprising 3240 patients were included. Subjects were predominantly male (73%) and had a mean age of 66 years. The dTRA group had a lower risk of RAO [RR 0.43 (95% CI, 0.26-0.69); P = 0.0005; I 2 = 0%] and had a shorter hemostasis time [MD -22.85 min (95% CI, -39.06 to -6.65); P = 0.006; I 2 = 99%]. The dTRA group had a higher crossover rate [RR 3.04 (95% CI, 1.88-4.91); P = 0.00001; I 2 = 56%] and a longer access time [MD 0.68 min (95% CI, 0.17-1.18); P = 0.009; I 2 = 99%]. The TRA group had a lower rate of unsuccessful cannulation [RR 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70-0.95); P = 0.01; I 2 = 92%]. There was no significant difference between the groups for radial artery spasm and EASY type I-III hematomas.
Conclusion: dTRA is a safe alternative to conventional TRA for coronary interventions with a lower risk of RAO. Future trials are required to further compare both approaches.
期刊介绍：
Critical Pathways in Cardiology provides a single source for the diagnostic and therapeutic protocols in use at hospitals worldwide for patients with cardiac disorders. The Journal presents critical pathways for specific diagnoses—complete with evidence-based rationales—and also publishes studies of these protocols" effectiveness.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
