Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Division of Cardiology, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Dec;96(7):1381-1389. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28623. Epub 2019 Nov 29.
Systematically review the literature for cardiac catheterization and coronary angiography via distal transradial access (dTRA) and its outcomes.
dTRA, via anatomical snuffbox, may have several advantages over conventional transradial access (cTRA) for percutaneous cardiac procedures, including easier left-sided access for aorto-coronary grafts, future proximal radial artery preservation, and patient and operator comfort. However, its procedural characteristics and safety profile remain unclear.
Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to September 2018. Two authors independently performed two-stage selection and data extraction. Reports assessing the dTRA approach for cardiac intervention in adults reporting any outcomes were eligible. Descriptive summary statistics were calculated from pooled data.
A total of 19 publications comprising 4,212 participants undergoing dTRA were included. Mean age was 63.8 years, and 23.0% were female. dTRA was primarily undertaken for assessment of stable coronary artery disease (87.6%), with 41.7% for diagnostic procedures and 46.9% undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The overall success rate for undertaking the dTRA approach was 95.4% (69-100%). Complications occurred in 2.4% of cases, of which the leading complications were bleeding/hematoma (18.2%). Complication rates did not significantly differ between dTRA and cTRA. The occurrence of radial artery occlusion in patients undergoing dTRA was low (1.7%).
Observational data demonstrate that dTRA is a safe and feasible method for percutaneous cardiac procedures, with high rates of procedural success and low rates of complication. As data comparing dTRA with cTRA remain limited, future high-quality randomized comparative studies are required.
系统回顾经远端桡动脉入路(dTRA)行心脏导管检查和冠状动脉造影的文献,并评估其结果。
与传统经桡动脉入路(cTRA)相比,经桡动脉入路(dTRA)经解剖鼻烟窝入路,可能具有一些经皮心脏介入的优势,包括更容易进行主动脉-冠状动脉搭桥术的左侧入路、未来近端桡动脉的保护以及患者和操作者的舒适度。然而,其手术特点和安全性仍不清楚。
检索 Ovid MEDLINE 和 EMBASE 数据库,检索时间截至 2018 年 9 月。两位作者独立进行了两阶段筛选和数据提取。评估成人经 dTRA 行心脏介入的报告任何结局的研究均符合入选标准。从汇总数据中计算描述性汇总统计数据。
共纳入 19 项研究,包括 4212 例接受 dTRA 的患者。患者平均年龄为 63.8 岁,23.0%为女性。dTRA 主要用于稳定型冠状动脉疾病的评估(87.6%),其中 41.7%用于诊断性操作,46.9%行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。行 dTRA 入路的总体成功率为 95.4%(69%-100%)。并发症发生率为 2.4%,其中主要并发症为出血/血肿(18.2%)。dTRA 和 cTRA 的并发症发生率无显著差异。接受 dTRA 的患者桡动脉闭塞的发生率较低(1.7%)。
观察性数据表明,dTRA 是一种安全可行的经皮心脏介入方法,其手术成功率高,并发症发生率低。由于比较 dTRA 与 cTRA 的数据仍然有限,因此需要未来开展高质量的随机对照研究。