The Clinical Usefulness of a Tiger Catheter in Diagnostic Coronary Angiography via the Transradial Approach.
- Author:
Yong Chan CHO
1
;
Weon KIM
;
Jae Sung BAN
;
Jong Tae KIM
;
Moung Ju NO
;
An Duk JEONG
;
Sang Chol CHO
;
Won Yu KANG
;
Sun Ho HWANG
;
Wan KIM
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords: Coronary angiography; Radial artery; Diagnostic equipment
- MeSH: Angiography; Blood Vessels; Catheters; Constriction, Pathologic; Coronary Angiography; Coronary Vessels; Diagnostic Equipment; Glycosaminoglycans; Humans; Radial Artery; Risk Factors; Spasm; Tigers
- From:Korean Circulation Journal 2009;39(1):11-15
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
- Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The most important complications of the transradial coronary approach during coronary artery angiography are occlusion of the radial artery and arterial spasm which are known to be influenced by catheter size, procedure time, and repeat procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of a Tiger catheter (TC) which was designed for the selection of right and left coronary artery ostia simultaneously, compared with the Judgkins catheter (JC) during transradial coronary angiography (CAG). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred forty-four patients were randomized between groups who underwent CAG with a standard 5F JC or a TC. The procedure time and vasospasm of the radial artery, which were expressed as stenosis of the vessel diameter, were examined using a transradial approach. Four parts of the blood vessel diameter were measured at baseline, during injection of the vasodilator, and at the end of the procedure. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in gender, age, weight, or other cardiovascular risk factors between the two groups of patients. CAG was successfully performed using a TC in 89% of the patients. A TC was associated with a significantly shorter total procedure time than the JC for diagnostic CAG (451+/-120.4 vs. 542.3+/-180.5 sec, p=0.001), respectively. There was no significant difference in stenosis between the two groups (36% vs. 41% in TC and JC, respectively, p=0.358). There were no angiographic or clinical complications in each group. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the TC is associated with decreased total CAG procedure time compared with the JC.
