Randomized study comparing incidence of radial artery occlusion post-percutaneous coronary intervention between two conventional compression devices using a novel air-inflation technique

Abstract

AIM To compare post‐percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) radial artery occlusion (RAO) incidence between two conventional radial artery compression devices using a novel air‐inflation technique. METHODS One hundred consecutive patients post‐PCI were randomized 1:1 to Safeguard or TR band compression devices. Post‐radial sheath removal, each compression device was inflated with additional 2 mL of air above index bleeding point during air‐filled device application and gradually down‐titrated accordingly. RAO was defined as absence of Doppler flow signal performed at 24 h and at 6 wk post‐PCI. Patients with missing data were excluded. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. RESULTS All patients had 6F radial sheath inserted. No significant differences were observed between Safeguard Radial (n = 42) vs TR band (n = 42) in terms of age (63 ± 11 years vs 67 ± 11 years), clinical presentation (electives, n = 18 vs n = 16; acute coronary syndrome, n = 24 vs n = 26) and total procedural heparin (7778 ± 2704 IU vs 7825 ± 2450 IU). RAO incidence was not significantly different between groups at 24 h (2% vs 0%, P = 0.32) and 6 wk (0%, both). CONCLUSION Safeguard Radial and TR band did not demonstrate significant between‐group differences in short‐term RAO incidence. Lack of evidence of RAO in all post‐ PCI patients at 6 wk follow‐up, regardless of radial compression device indicate advantage of using the novel and pragmatic air‐inflation technique. Further work is required to more accurately confirm these findings.