Clinical experience with distal transradial access for endovascular treatment of various noncoronary interventions in a multicenter study

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 15; no. 8; p. e0237798
• Main Authors: Park, Sung Eun, Cho, Soo Buem, Baek, Hye Jin, Moon, Jin Il, Ryu, Kyeong Hwa, Ha, Ji Young, Lee, Sangmin, Won, Jungho, Ahn, Jong-Hwa, Kim, Ran, Choi, Sun Young
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: San Francisco Public Library of Science 21.08.2020; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Angioplasty; Biology and Life Sciences; Cardiovascular system; Care and treatment; Complications; Embolization; Engineering and Technology; Feasibility studies; Health aspects; Hemostasis; Hemostatics; Hospitals; Ischemia; Medical imaging; Medicine; Medicine and Health Sciences; Methods; Occlusion; Patients; Physiological aspects; Radius (Anatomy); Research and Analysis Methods; Safety; Uterus; Vascular surgery; Veins & arteries; South Korea; United States > US; Japan
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237798

Transradial access is a well-known alternative to conventional transfemoral access for interventional procedures. Recently, transradial access through the "snuffbox", which lies in the radial dorsal aspect of the hand, has been introduced as a new technique with positional versatility. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the clinical feasibility and safety of distal transradial access for interventional procedures in a retrospective, multicenter study. Distal transradial access was attempted in 46 patients (36 men and 10 women; mean age, 64 years) who underwent 47 consecutive procedures from January 2018 to December 2019. Procedures included chemoembolization (19/47, 40.4%), bronchial artery embolization (7/47, 14.9%), renal intervention (3/47, 6.4%), arteriovenous fistula angioplasty (7/47, 14.9%), subclavian artery stenting (5/47, 10.6%), other embolization (5/47, 10.6%), and uterine artery embolization (1/47, 2.1%). We recorded the success rate of the procedures, complications, and postprocedural hemostasis time during the follow-up period. The technical success of distal transradial access without major complications was 97.9% (46/47). Of the 46 patients, one patient (2.2%) had a minor complication, which was a thrombotic segmental occlusion of the distal radial artery. Of the enrolled patients, only one patient did not complete the transradial access procedure via the snuffbox because the left proximal subclavian artery was occluded and a crossover to conventional transfemoral access was performed. The mean postprocedural hemostasis time was 131.7 minutes (range, 120-360 minutes). Distal transradial access can be a valid option for the endovascular treatment of various noncoronary interventions with technical feasibility and safety.