Distal radial approach: a review on achieving a high success rate
- PDF / 1,207,191 Bytes
- 9 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 80 Downloads / 180 Views
INVITED REVIEW ARTICLE
Distal radial approach: a review on achieving a high success rate Fuminobu Yoshimachi1 · Yuji Ikari2 Received: 28 October 2020 / Accepted: 29 October 2020 © Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics 2020
Abstract Introduction The transradial approach is the standard for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Moreover, to lead to the evolution of PCI, a new approach site was developed, namely the distal radial approach (dRA). Anatomy and vessel diameter The vessel diameter of the distal radial artery is smaller than that of the forearm radial artery; hence, use of 1 Fr size or a sheath with a thinner outer diameter is recommended. Ultrasound examination before the procedure provides useful information on this matter. Puncture There are two approaches to puncture: proximal site puncture of the distal radial artery and distal site puncture. Based on anatomical characteristics, the puncture angle is large on the former and small on the latter. Although a learning curve for the dRA puncture is needed, the use of ultrasound facilitates the process. Hemostasis Using a hemostatic device dedicated to the dRA simplifies observation after PCI. Hemostatic devices for the conventional radial approach or simple bandage with an elastic band can be useful. Usually, less hemostasis time is needed for the dRA compared with the conventional radial approach. Success rate Studies have shown high success rates of the dRA (approximately 88–99.5%). Advantages and disadvantages Advantages of the dRA are patient comfort, short hemostasis time, less restraint for the patients after PCI, and easy observation at the ward. Disadvantages are the learning curve required for the puncture and the small diameter of the distal radial artery. Conclusion The dRA is a new approach site for PCI. Further research is warranted for the selection of suitable patients to undergo PCI through the dRA.
Introduction The transradial approach (TRA) [1] is currently the standard for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) owing to the lower rates of complications, such as bleeding and blood transfusion, in comparison with the previously preferred transfemoral approach, particularly in the treatment of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) [2–4]. Based on this evidence, the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Guidelines on myocardial revascularization [5], Japanese Circulation Society (JCS) 2018 Guideline on Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome [6], and JCS 2018 Guideline on Revascularization of Stable Coronary * Fuminobu Yoshimachi yoshimachi‑[email protected] 1
Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, 1838 Ishikawa Machi, Hachioji City, Tokyo 192‑0032, Japan
Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Japan
2
Artery Disease [7] recommended TRA as the standard approach for elective intervention and treatment of acute coronary syndrome. The evidence level I A strongly recommends that the TRA should be used for PCI unless contraindicated for part
Data Loading...
