Search

Highlights •RAO remains the most frequent post-procedural complication of transradial access, restricting the use of the same radial artery for future procedures, as a conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting or for arteriovenous fistula creation in patients requiring hemodialysis. •The real-world reported incidence of RAO remains high, with wide variability in the uptake of RAO prevention strategies. •The paper reviews the main recent advances in the field of RAO prevention and provides a series of expert recommendations to prevent RAO. •This consensus document is meant to provide guidance to increase the adoption of simple and effective methods to achieve an institutional rate of RAO

Objectives The study sought to evaluate whether prophylactic ipsilateral ulnar artery compression during radial artery hemostasis could reduce the risk of radial artery occlusion (RAO). Background RAO after transradial access (TRA) is a structural complication of TRA. It limits future ipsilateral TRA and may cause transient pain. Maintaining radial artery flow during hemostasis reduces the incidence of acute RAO. Ipsilateral ulnar compression increases radial artery flow and could impact the incidence of RAO. Methods Three thousand patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization using TRA were randomized to receive either standard patent hemostasis protocol (Group I) or prophylactic ipsilateral ulnar compression in addition to patent hemostasis (Group II). Using plethysmography, radial artery patency was evaluated at the time of removal of the compression device as well as 24 h and 30 days after the procedure. The primary study endpoint was 30-day RAO. Results The primary endpoint, 30-day RAO, was significantly reduced in patients with patent hemostasis and prophylactic ulnar compression compared with standard patent hemostasis (0.9% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.0001). Baseline patient and procedural characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. RAO was significantly reduced by prophylactic ulnar compression at all time intervals (p Conclusions Prophylactic ipsilateral ulnar compression during radial artery hemostasis is an effective, simple, and inexpensive technique that lowers the risk of RAO after TRA.

Objectives This study sought to evaluate outcomes of same-day discharge (SDD) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus overnight hospitalization (ON). Background Although there are data on the safety and feasibility of SDD after PCI, ON continues to be prevalent. Methods The Cochrane search strategy was used to search the PubMed database, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for relevant literature. Thirteen studies (5 randomized and 8 observational) of SDD after uncomplicated PCI versus ON met inclusion criteria. Data were pooled using a random effects model, and reported as odds ratios (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary outcomes were incidence of total complications, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and rehospitalization within 30 days after PCI. Results A total of 13 studies, involving 111,830 patients were pooled. There was significant variation in the definition of outcomes across studies. For total complications, the strategy of SDD compared with ON after PCI had an estimated OR of 1.20 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.74) in randomized and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.27 to 1.66) in observational studies. Similar results were found for MACE (randomized, OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.45 to 2.18; observational, OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.06 to 5.57) and rehospitalizations (randomized, OR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.74; observational, OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.10 to 3.98) at 30 days post PCI. Conclusions There is considerable heterogeneity across published studies comparing SDD with ON. This, coupled with the low event rate and wide corresponding CIs, suggest that an adequately powered multicenter randomized trial comparing SDD with ON would require a very large sample size (>17,000). Until such a trial is completed, SDD after uncomplicated PCI seems a reasonable approach in selected patients.

We greatly appreciate the letter by Dr. Koutouzis and colleagues and their interest in our study [(1)][1]. As rightly pointed out by the authors, the ULTRA (ULnar Artery Transient Compression Facilitating Radial Artery Patent Hemostasis) study [(2)][2] and PROPHET-II Trial (PROPhylactic

We read with great interest and concern the paper by Le May et al. [(1)][1] regarding the role of radial approach in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Our concerns are due to their inappropriate interpretation of clinical trial data and spurious arguments against radial access that runs