Radial versus femoral approach for saphenous vein grafts angiography and interventions

ConclusionsRadial access for SVG angiography and intervention is safe and feasible, without increasing fluoroscopy time. In experienced centers, radial access was associated with fewer catheters used, lower contrast volume, and lower rate of vascular access-site bleeding complications. Moreover, outpatients undergoing SVG-PCI though the radial approach had a higher likelihood of a same-day discharge home.Condensed abstractThe current study investigated the safety and feasibility of performing SVG angiography and interventions using the radial access as compared to the femoral approach. Procedural-related data such as fluoroscopy time and access-site crossovers were comparable for both groups. Fewer total number of catheters, lower periprocedural and bleeding complications, and lower volume of contrast were observed in the radial group. Moreover, outpatients undergoing SVG interventions though the radial approach had a higher likelihood of a same-day discharge home.
Source: American Heart Journal - Category: Cardiology Source Type: research