Transradial versus transfemoral ancillary approach in complex structural, coronary, and peripheral interventions. Results from the multicenter ancillary registry: A study of the Italian Radial Club.
Bernardo CorteseStefano RigattieriTiziana C AranzullaFilippo RussoAzeem LatibFrancesco BurzottaPierfrancesco AgostoniAlfonso IelasiFabio TarantinoAlessandro SticchiBernardo CorteseMauro de BenedictisCarlo TraniRoberto BoccalettiRosa MiccoliOrazio ValsecchiAntonio ColomboPublished in: Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions (2017)
In our study TR ancillary approach was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of major bleedings, without jeopardizing the success of complex structural, coronary, and peripheral percutaneous interventions. The value of the transradial route for ancillary vascular approach during percutaneous interventions has not been adequately validated yet. We retrospectively included 906 patients, 433 receiving TR and 473 TF/TB ancillary approach at nine high-volume centers for the following interventions: structural cardiac interventions, complex PCI, EVAR and complex peripheral angioplasty. Procedural success was similar, whereas in-hospital BARC bleedings were more common in the transfemoral/brachial group. Similar results were observed in a propensity score-matched population. In our study TR ancillary approach was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of major bleedings, without jeopardizing the success of complex interventions. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.