The changes of radial arterial diameter and procedural outcomes of repeated-use radial artery in transradial.
10.4070/kcj.2000.30.12.1501
- Author:
Byung Su YOO
;
Seung Hwan LEE
;
Junghan YOON
;
Bong Ki LEE
;
Ji Yean KO
;
Seung Nyun KIM
;
Myung Ok LEE
;
Sung Oh HWANG
;
Kyung Hoon CHOE
- Publication Type:Original Article
- MeSH:
Coronary Angiography;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Incidence;
Radial Artery*
- From:Korean Circulation Journal
2000;30(12):1501-1506
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Practical concerns about transradial approach are increasing in consideration of high procedural success rate, low local complications, and patient's convenience. There was no available data about repeated-use of radial artery for coronary procedures. We evaluate the changes of radial arterial diameter and procedural outcomes of repeated transradial procedure. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Of consecutive 1771 transradial coronary procedures, 117 patients received repeated transradial procedures through the same radial artery. Radial arterial diameter, vascular access time and procedural outcomes were evaluated in between the group of first-use and repeated-use of radial artery. RESULTS: Among 117 patients of second transradial coronary procedure in the repeated-use group, 47 patients (41.6%) underwent coronary intervention and 66 patients (58.4%) underwent coronary angiography. The right radial approach was used in 82.9% of the cases. There was no significant difference in radial artery mean diameter between pre-procedure and 1 day after procedure in patients with first-use and repeated-use group. There was no significant change of radial arterial diameter after first-use depending on the SAR (the ratio of sheath outer diameter to radial artery inner diameter). However, after repeated-use of radial artery, there was significant reduction of radial arterial diameter 1 day after procedure in the patients with SAR more than 0.9 (p<0.05). In repeated-use group, the mean radial arterial diameter was 2.63 +/- 0.35mm mm before the procedure and 2.51 +/- 0.29mm during follow-up (136 +/- 123 days) (p<0.05). There was no significant difference of the vascular access time between the first-use and repeated-use procedures (2.9+/-3.1 vs 3.3+/-3.6 minutes, p<0.05). The procedural success and vascular complication rate of repeated-use of radial artery were as similar to those of the first-use, but total occlusion of radial artery was higher in the repeated-use group (2.6% vs 0.7%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The diameter of radial artery after transradial procedures was significantly reduced during follow-up and the incidence of asymptomatic radial artery occlusion was more frequent after repeated-use. However, repeated-use of radial artery was feasible in most patients with high procedural success rate and low vascular complications.
