Coronary Angiography,, Percutaneous Coronary, Transradial Approach,
Conditions
Keywords
Transradial approach,, Coronary angiography
Brief summary
Previous studies have shown that the transradial cardiac catheterization has decreased not only bleeding complications related to the access site and procedural discomfort but also morbidity and hospitalization as compared to transfemoral approach. At present, the right radial approach (RRA) is the first choice routinely for coronary angiography and interventions in daily clinical practice despite more marked subclavian artery tortuosity than left radial approach (LRA). Although LRA has been thought to be more direct access to the ascending aorta similar to transfemoral approach and may reduce fluoroscopy time and cerebrovascular complications compared with RRA, the application of LRA for coronary intervention is still low. Moreover, several studies have also obtained conflicting results showing no difference in procedural success rate compared LRA and RRA using Judkins catheters. To date, it remains unclear whether LRA is superior to RRA in term of safety and feasibility for coronary angiography and interventions in real world practice and few data of randomized control trial are available. The aim of this study was to randomly investigate and compare the safety and feasibility of LRA compared with RRA for coronary diagnostic angiography in Chinese subjects. The investigators will enroll consecutively for 2 years all patients undergoing coronary diagnostic procedures through trans radial approach. The primary outcome was total procedural duration. Secondary outcomes included fluoroscopy time, dose of radiation including cumulative air kerma and dose area product, contrast volume and the incidence of vascular complications.
Interventions
PROCEDUREleft radial approach
Coronary diagnostic procedures performed through left radial approach
PROCEDURERight radial approach
coronary diagnostic procedures performed through right radial approach
Sponsors
Capital Medical University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* All consecutive patients who undergo to diagnostic coronary procedures
Exclusion criteria
* Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction * Previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery * Hemodynamic instability
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Total procedural duration | 1 day |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Fluoroscopy time | 7 days | — |
| Dose of radiation | 7 days | Dose of radiation include cumulative air kerma (CAK) and CAK dose area product (CAK DAP) |
| Contrast volume | 7 days | — |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Vascular complications | 7 days | Vascular complications include stroke, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, lose of radial artery pulse, puncture site bleeding and forearm hematoma. |
Countries
China
Outcome results
None listed