Search

Data comparing outcomes of distal radial (DR) and traditional radial (TR) access of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are limited. Online databases including Medline and Cochrane Central databases were explored to identify studies that compared DR and TR access for PCI. The primary outcome was the rate of radial artery occlusion (RAO) and access failure. Secondary outcomes included access site hematoma, access site bleeding, access site pain, radial artery spasm, radial artery dissection, and crossover. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) with a random-effect model, 95% confidence interval (CI), and p <0.05 were used for statistical significance. Metaregression was performed for 16 studies with 9,973 (DR 4,750 and TR 5,523) patients were included. Compared with TR, DR was associated with lower risk of RAO (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.90, I 2  = 42.6%, p = 0.02). RAO was lower in DR undergoing coronary angiography rather than PCI. Access failure rate (OR 1.77, 95% CI 0.69 to 4.55, I 2 87.36%, p = 0.24), access site hematoma (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.83, I 2 0%, p = 0.68), access site pain (OR 2.22, 95% CI 0.28 to 17.38, I 2 0%, p = 0.45), access site bleeding (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.62, I 2 85.11%, p = 0.91), radial artery spasm (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.29, I 2 0%, p = 0.35), radial artery dissection (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.84, I 2 0%, p = 0.45), and crossover (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.70, I 2 25.48%, p = 0.33) did not show any significant difference. DR was associated with lower incidence RAO when compared with TR, whereas other procedural-related complications were similar., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to assess whether there were significant interactions of procedural access strategies and lesion characteristics with bleeding and ischemic events among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients anticoagulated with rivaroxaban or warfarin following a percutaneous coronary intervention., Background: Among stented AF patients, the impact of procedural access strategies or lesion characteristics on antithrombotic safety and efficacy outcomes is unclear., Methods: In the PIONEER AF-PCI (An Open-label, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Study Exploring Two Treatment Strategies of Rivaroxaban and a Dose-Adjusted Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Treatment Strategy in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation Who Undergo Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, 2,124 patients were randomized to 3 groups and followed for 12 months: 1) rivaroxaban 15 mg once daily plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor (n = 709); 2) rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice a day plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (n = 709); and 3) dose-adjusted warfarin plus DAPT (n = 706). Kaplan-Meier rates of clinically significant bleeding and major adverse cardiovascular events were compared between treatments stratified by subgroups of procedure type and lesion characteristics., Results: Compared with warfarin, both rivaroxaban regimens consistently reduced clinically significant bleeding across subgroups of radial versus femoral arterial access and by vascular closure device use. Treatment effect of rivaroxaban on major adverse cardiovascular events did not vary when stratified by ischemia-driven revascularization, urgency of revascularization, location of culprit artery, presence of bifurcation lesion, presence of thrombus, type, and length of stent or number of stents (interaction p > 0.05 for all subgroups)., Conclusions: Among stented AF patients requiring long-term oral anticoagulation, there was no effect modification by procedure or lesion characteristics of either clinically significant bleeding or major adverse cardiovascular events. Rivaroxaban-based therapy was superior to warfarin plus DAPT in bleeding outcomes regardless of the type of stent or arterial access during the index coronary revascularization. (A Study Exploring Two Strategies of Rivaroxaban [JNJ39039039; BAY-59-7939] and One of Oral Vitamin K Antagonist in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Who Undergo Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PIONEER AF-PCI]; NCT01830543)., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been the cornerstone of antithrombotic management for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, approximately 10% of these patients have concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and require chronic oral anticoagulant (OAC) in addition to DAPT. This traditional "triple therapy" has been associated with a three to four-fold increased risk of bleeding. The safety of non-vitamin K OAC (NOAC)-based strategies, using a NOAC plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor, has been compared to vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-based triple therapy in the PIONEER AF-PCI and REDUAL PCI randomized trials, both of which have demonstrated that NOAC-based strategies are safer and provide an attractive alternative to VKA-based triple therapy among AF patients who undergo PCI. This article reviews the rationale, evidence, and recent evaluation of triple antithrombotic therapy among AF patients undergoing PCI., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)