Randomized comparison of transradial coronary angiography via right or left radial artery approaches

9Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that the right radial approach encounters more tortuosity than the left radial approach during transradial coronary angiography. The objective of this study was to compare the procedural difficulty of the right and left radial approaches in the modern era with dedicated transradial catheters. One hundred ninety-three patients scheduled for transradial coronary angiography with normal Allen test results and without histories of coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized to the right or left radial approach. The choice of catheter was left to the discretion of the operator, with the preferred catheter being a dedicated transradial Optitorque catheter. The primary end point was procedural difficulty, defined as (1) hydrophilic or coronary wire use for tortuosity, (2) stiff wire use for the coronary engagement, (3) multiple catheters used, or (4) nonselective injection. The clinical characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Procedural success was achieved in 98 of 101 (98%) in the right radial group and 91 of 92 (99%) in the left radial group. Procedural difficulty, fluoroscopy time, and contrast use were similar between the 2 groups. The use of a single catheter was more common in the right radial group (73% vs 18%, p <0.001). In conclusion, procedural success and difficulty were similar in the comparison groups. The right and left radial approaches are feasible and effective to perform coronary angiography and intervention. © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kanei, Y., Nakra, N. C., Liou, M., Vales, L. L., Gowda, R., Rosero, H., … Fox, J. T. (2011). Randomized comparison of transradial coronary angiography via right or left radial artery approaches. American Journal of Cardiology, 107(2), 195–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.08.065

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free