Safety and efficacy of transradial aortoiliac interventions

Abstract

Background: This study compares transradial approach (TRA) aortoiliac angioplasty/stenting to the transfemoral approach (TFA).

Methods: We reviewed our peripheral database for aortoiliac interventions performed between 2007 and 2009. Demographics, clinical characteristics, procedural, and lesion details were collected. The efficacy endpoints included procedural success, ankle-brachial index (ABI) improvement, and time to discharge. The safety endpoints were as follows: occurrence of intra-/periprocedural complications, 30-day MACE, and access-site complications (minor/major). The subjects were divided into two groups, TRA and TFA, and compared using appropriate statistics.

Results: Twenty-seven patients had 33 lesions treated via TRA, and 41 patients had 47 lesions treated via TFA access. Baseline demographic differences between the TRA and TFA groups were similar, including mean Rutherford category (2.9 vs. 2.6, P = 0.31) and preintervention ABI (0.64 vs. 0.67, P = 0.80). There was a significantly higher percentage of total occlusions in the TRA group (27.3 vs. 8.5%, P = 0.03). Dye use (238 vs. 213 mL, P = 0.35) and fluoroscopy time (30 vs. 27 min, P = 0.60) were similar. Procedural success rate was similar (87.9 vs. 97.8%, P = 0.15), as well as the improvement in mean ABI (TRA: 0.64-0.77 and TFA: 0.67-0.85, P = 0.77). The time to discharge was significantly shorter for the TRA group (14.4 vs. 20.9 hr, P = 0.003). There were no 30-day MACE or major access-site complications, but minor access-site complications were lower in the TRA group (0.0 vs. 7.3%, P = 0.28), although nonsignificant.

Conclusions: The TRA to aortoiliac interventions is as safe and effective as the TFA with the advantage of a lower rate of access-site complications and shorter hospitalization time.