Procedural Volume and Outcomes With Radial or Femoral Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention

被引:64
|
作者
Jolly, Sanjit S. [1 ,2 ]
Cairns, John [3 ]
Yusuf, Salim [1 ,2 ]
Niemela, Kari [4 ,5 ]
Steg, Philippe Gabriel [6 ]
Worthley, Matthew [7 ]
Ferrari, Emile [8 ]
Cantor, Warren J. [9 ]
Fung, Anthony [3 ]
Valettas, Nicholas [1 ,2 ]
Rokoss, Michael [1 ,2 ]
Olivecrona, Goran K. [10 ]
Widimsky, Petr [11 ]
Cheema, Asim N. [12 ]
Gao, Peggy [1 ,2 ]
Mehta, Shamir R. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[2] Hamilton Hlth Sci, Populat Hlth Res Inst, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[3] Univ British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[4] Tampere Univ Hosp, Tampere, Finland
[5] Ctr Heart, Tampere, Finland
[6] Univ Paris Diderot, Paris, France
[7] Univ Adelaide, Royal Adelaide Hosp, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[8] Hop Louis Pasteur, F-06002 Nice, France
[9] Univ Toronto, Southlake Reg Hlth Ctr, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
[10] Skane Univ Hosp, Lund, Sweden
[11] Charles Univ Prague, Hosp Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
[12] Univ Toronto, St Michaels Hosp, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
关键词
RIVAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.052
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives The study sought to evaluate the relationship between procedural volume and outcomes with radial and femoral approach. Background RIVAL (RadIal Vs. femorAL) was a randomized trial of radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography/intervention (N = 7,021),which overall did not show a difference in primary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or non-coronary artery bypass graft major bleeding. Methods In pre-specified subgroup analyses, the hazard ratios for the primary outcome were compared among centers divided by tertiles and among individual operators. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the independent effect of center and operator volumes after adjusting for other variables. Results In high-volume radial centers, the primary outcome was reduced with radial versus femoral access (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.87) but not in intermediate-(HR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.72) or low-volume centers (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.31; interaction p 0.021). High-volume centers enrolled a higher proportion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). After adjustment for STEMI, the benefit of radial access persisted at high-volume radial centers. There was no difference in the primary outcome between radial and femoral access by operator volume: high-volume operators (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.28), intermediate (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.27), and low (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.65; interaction p 0.536). However, in a multivariable model, overall center volume and radial center volume were independently associated with the primary outcome but not femoral center volume (overall percutaneous coronary intervention volume HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.96; radial volume HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80 to 0.97; and femoral volume HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.07; p 0.98). Conclusions Procedural volume and expertise are important, particularly for radial percutaneous coronary intervention. (A Trial of Trans-radial Versus Trans-femoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] Access Site Approach in Patients With Unstable Angina or Myocardial Infarction Managed With an Invasive Strategy [RIVAL]; NCT01014273) (C) 2014 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
引用
收藏
页码:954 / 963
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Relationship Between Procedural Volume and Outcomes
    Apurva O. Badheka
    Sidakpal S. Panaich
    Shilpkumar Arora
    Nilay Patel
    Nileshkumar J. Patel
    Chirag Savani
    Abhishek Deshmukh
    Mauricio G. Cohen
    Current Cardiology Reports, 2016, 18
  • [22] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Relationship Between Procedural Volume and Outcomes
    Badheka, Apurva O.
    Panaich, Sidakpal S.
    Arora, Shilpkumar
    Patel, Nilay
    Patel, Nileshkumar J.
    Savani, Chirag
    Deshmukh, Abhishek
    Cohen, Mauricio G.
    CURRENT CARDIOLOGY REPORTS, 2016, 18 (04)
  • [23] A Randomized Comparison of the Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography and Intervention The RADIAL-CABG Trial (RADIAL Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography and Intervention)
    Michael, Tesfaldet T.
    Alomar, Mohammed
    Papayannis, Aristotelis
    Mogabgab, Owen
    Patel, Vishal G.
    Rangan, Bavana V.
    Luna, Michael
    Hastings, Jeffrey L.
    Grodin, Jerrold
    Abdullah, Shuaib
    Banerjee, Subhash
    Brilakis, Emmanouil S.
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2013, 6 (11) : 1138 - 1144
  • [24] Distal Versus Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention The DISCO RADIAL Trial
    Aminian, Adel
    Sgueglia, Gregory A.
    Wiemer, Marcus
    Kefer, Joelle
    Gasparini, Gabriele L.
    Ruzsa, Zoltan
    van Leeuwen, Maarten A. H.
    Ungureanu, Claudiu
    Leibundgut, Gregor
    Vandeloo, Bert
    Kedev, Sasko
    Bernat, Ivo
    Ratib, Karim
    Iglesias, Juan F.
    Al Hage, Elias
    Posteraro, Giuseppe A.
    Pascut, Dan
    Maes, Frederic
    Regazzoli, Damiano
    Kakonyi, Kornel
    Meijers, Thomas A.
    Colletti, Giuseppe
    Krivoshei, Lian
    Lochy, Stijn
    Zafirovska, Biljana
    Horak, David
    Nolan, James
    Degrauwe, Sophie
    Tobita, Kazuki
    Saito, Shigeru
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2022, 15 (12) : 1191 - 1201
  • [25] Radial-to-femoral access crossover is not associated with adverse outcomes in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention
    Azzalini, Lorenzo
    Khan, Razi
    Al-Hawwas, Malek
    Hatem, Raja
    Fortier, Annik
    L'Allier, Philippe L.
    Ly, Hung Q.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2014, 64 (11) : B246 - B246
  • [26] Predictors and Clinical Outcomes of Crossover From Radial to Femoral Access During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Sahinkus, Salih
    Aksoy, Muhammet Necati Murat
    Aydin, Ercan
    ANGIOLOGY, 2020, 71 (09) : 847 - 852
  • [27] Radial versus Femoral Access for Octogenarians Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Koifman, Edward
    Steinvil, Arie
    Rogers, Toby
    Buchanan, Kyle
    Alraies, Chadi
    Torguson, Rebecca
    Gai, Jiaxiang
    Bernardo, Nelson
    Ben-Dor, Itsik
    Gallino, Robert
    Lager, Robert
    Pichard, Augusto
    Suddath, William
    Satler, Lowell
    Waksman, Ron
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2017, 10 (03) : S36 - S36
  • [28] Current Practices in Korea: Coronary Angiography and Intervention Using Radial Access
    Jeong, Han Saem
    Hong, Soon Jun
    KOREAN CIRCULATION JOURNAL, 2015, 45 (06) : 449 - 450
  • [29] Comparison of Left Radial vs Femoral Artery Access for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
    von Koch, Sacharias
    Andersson, Jonas
    Calais, Fredrik
    Dworeck, Christian
    Grimfjard, Per
    James, Stefan
    Omerovic, Elmir
    Zwackman, Sammy
    Erlinge, David
    Birgander, Mats
    Mohammad, Moman
    Zhou, Mikael
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2024, 84 (18) : B425 - B426
  • [30] Radial versus femoral access for elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary angiography and intervention: insights from the RIVAL trial
    Cantor, Warren J.
    Mehta, Shamir R.
    Yuan, Fei
    Dzavik, Vladimr
    Worthley, Matthew
    Niemela, Kari
    Valentin, Vicent
    Fung, Anthony
    Cheema, Asim N.
    Widimsky, Petr
    Natarajan, Madhu
    Jedrzejowski, Barbara
    Jolly, Sanjit S.
    AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL, 2015, 170 (05) : 880 - 886