Comparison of radial access versus femoral access with the use of a vascular closure device for the prevention of vascular complications and mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND

Radial access (RA) and vascular closure devices (VCD) have been shown to be superior to transfemoral access (TFA) with regard to the prevention of vascular complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

OBJECTIVE

The present study evaluates whether RA is associated with less vascular complications and a lower mortality than VCD.

METHODS

A total of 6999 consecutive PCI patients were studied through a single-centre prospective registry from January 2011 to August 2015. RA was applied in 1385 patients (20%), VCDs with Angio-Seal were implanted in 2145 patients (30%) and manual compression of TFA was performed in 3468 patients (50%).

RESULTS

RA and VCD patients had comparable baseline risk profiles. The overall vascular complication rate was 2.0% (n = 137) and was composed of false aneurysms (n = 85), clinically relevant haematomas (n = 27), arteriovenous fistulas (n = 12), arterial occlusions (n = 11) and local infections (n = 2). Vascular complications occurred in 0.6% of RA patients, 1.8% of VCD patients and 2.6% of TFA patients (p < .01). In-hospital mortality was 0.8% in RA patients, 0.8% in VCD patients and 3.8% in TFA patients (p < .01). In a multivariate logistic regression model, RA, compared to VCD, was found to be independently associated with a lower rate of vascular complications (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.16-0.75), but not with lower mortality rates (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.51-2.85).

CONCLUSION

In this large all-comers PCI population, the radial approach, compared to the femoral approach with VCD use (Angio-Seal), was independently associated with a reduction of vascular complications, but not with lower mortality rates.