Current Practice of Transradial Coronary Angiography and Intervention: Results from the Korean Transradial Intervention Prospective Registry.
10.4070/kcj.2015.45.6.457
- Author:
Young Jin YOUN
1
;
Jun Won LEE
;
Sung Gyun AHN
;
Seung Hwan LEE
;
Junghan YOON
;
Byung Ryul CHO
;
Sang Sig CHEONG
;
Hee Yeol KIM
;
Jae Hwan LEE
;
Jang Ho BAE
;
Jin Bae LEE
;
Jon SUH
;
Keum Soo PARK
;
Kyoo Rok HAN
;
Myung Ho JEONG
;
Seung Woon RHA
;
Sung Ho HER
;
Yun Hyeong CHO
;
Sang Wook KIM
Author Information
1. Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Wonju, Korea. jyoon@yonsei.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Coronary angiography;
Percutaneous coronary intervention;
Radial artery;
Registries
- MeSH:
Catheters;
Consensus;
Coronary Angiography*;
Korea;
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention;
Prospective Studies*;
Radial Artery;
Registries
- From:Korean Circulation Journal
2015;45(6):457-468
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although increasing evidence has indicated that radial access is a beneficial technique, few studies have focused on Korean subjects. The aim of this study was to evaluate current practice of coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using radial access in South Korea. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 6338 subjects were analyzed from Korean Transradial Intervention prospective registry that was conducted at 20 centers in Korea. After evaluating the initial access, subjects intended for radial access were assessed for their baseline, procedure-related, and complication data. Subjects were categorized into three groups: group of overall subjects (n=5554); group of subjects who underwent PCI (n=1780); and group of subjects who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) (n=167). RESULTS: The rate of radial artery as an initial access and the rate of access site crossover was 87.6% and 4.4%, respectively, in overall subjects. Those rates were 82.4% and 8.1%, respectively, in subjects who underwent PCI, and 60.1% and 4.8%, respectively, in subjects who underwent PPCI. For subjects who underwent CAG, a 6-F introducer sheath and a 5-F angiographic catheter was the most commonly used. During PCI, a 6-F introducer sheath (90.6%) and a 6-F guiding catheter were standardly used. CONCLUSION: The large prospective registry allowed us to present the current practice of CAG and PCI using radial access. These data provides evidence to achieve consensus on radial access in CAG and PCI in the Korean population.
