Propensity-Adjusted Comparative Analysis of Radial Versus Femoral Access for Neurointerventional Treatments.

BACKGROUND

Transradial artery (TRA) catheterization for neuroendovascular procedures is associated with a lower risk of complications than transfemoral artery (TFA) procedures. However, the majority of literature on TRA access pertains to diagnostic procedures rather than interventional treatments.

OBJECTIVE

To compare TRA and TFA approaches for cerebrovascular interventions.

METHODS

All patients with an endovascular intervention performed at a single center from October 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were grouped into 2 cohorts on the basis of whether TRA or TFA access was used. Outcomes included complications, fluoroscopy times, and total contrast administered.

RESULTS

A total 579 interventional treatments were performed during the 15-mo study period. TFA procedures (n = 417) were associated with a significantly higher complication rate than TRA (n = 162) procedures (43 cases [10%] vs 5 cases [3%]; P = .008). After excluding patients who underwent thrombectomy and performing a propensity adjustment (including age, sex, pathology, procedure, sheath size, and catheter size), TRA catheterization was associated with decreased odds of a complication (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% CI 0.085-0.72; P = .01), but no significant difference in the amount of contrast administered (6.7-mL increase; 95% CI, -7.2 to 20.6; P = .34) or duration of fluoroscopy (2.1-min increase; 95% CI, -2.5 to 6.7; P = .37) compared with TFA catheterization.

CONCLUSION

Neurointerventional procedures and treatments for a variety of pathologies can be performed successfully using the TRA approach, which is associated with a lower risk of complications and no difference in fluoroscopy duration compared with the TFA approach.