Transulnar versus transradial access for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- PMID: 26332022
- DOI: 10.1002/ccd.26221
Transulnar versus transradial access for coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Abstract
Background: Although transfemoral access (TFA) remains the standard of care for patients undergoing coronary angiography (CA) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the USA, TRA is being increasingly used over TFA due to lower bleeding and mortality rates on the basis of meta-analyses and recently published MATRIX trial. In patients with unsuccessful ipsilateral radial access, TUA has been used as an alternative approach. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TUA and TRA have reached mixed conclusions regarding the use of transulnar approach for coronary procedures.
Objectives: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of published RCTs comparing the safety and efficacy of transulnar access (TUA) vs. transradial access (TRA) in patients undergoing CA or PCI.
Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for RCTs since inception through December, 2014. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model.
Results: Five RCTs involving 2,744 total patients were included in the meta-analysis. TUA compared with TRA had similar risks of MACE [risk ratio (RR): 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-1.36; P = 0.54] and access-related complications [RR: 0.92 (0.67-1.27); P = 0.62]. Higher rates of access cross-over [RR: 2.31 (1.07-4.98); P = 0.003] and number of punctures [1.57 vs. 1.4; mean difference (MD): 0.17; 95% CI: 0.08-0.26; P = 0.0002] were noted with TUA. There was no difference in arterial access time [12.8 vs. 10.9 min; MD: 1.86 (-1.35-5.7); P = 0.26], fluoroscopy time [7.6 vs. 7.2 min; MD: 0.37 (-0.39 - 1.13); P = 0.34] and contrast volume [151 vs. 153.7 ml; MD: -2.74 (-17.21 - 11.73); P = 0.71].
Conclusion: For patients requiring CA or PCI, TUA compared with TRA has similar efficacy and safety except for higher puncture rates and access cross-over.
Keywords: PCI; access cross-over; access-related complications; coronary angiography; coronary artery disease; transradial access; transulnar access.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Comment in
-
Transulnar catheterization: The road less traveled.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Apr;87(5):866-7. doi: 10.1002/ccd.26534. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016. PMID: 27085027
Similar articles
-
Transulnar Versus Transradial Access for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2021 May;26:39-45. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.11.001. Epub 2020 Nov 4. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2021. PMID: 33203582
-
Safety and efficacy of transulnar approach for coronary angiography and intervention.Chin Med J (Engl). 2010 Jul;123(13):1774-9. Chin Med J (Engl). 2010. PMID: 20819645 Clinical Trial.
-
Transulnar compared with transradial artery approach as a default strategy for coronary procedures: a randomized trial. The Transulnar or Transradial Instead of Coronary Transfemoral Angiographies Study (the AURA of ARTEMIS Study).Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Jun;6(3):252-61. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.000150. Epub 2013 Jun 4. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013. PMID: 23735472 Clinical Trial.
-
A comparison of standard versus low dose heparin on access-related complications after coronary angiography through radial access: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018 Jul-Aug;19(5 Pt B):575-579. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2017.10.018. Epub 2017 Nov 5. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018. PMID: 29223499 Review.
-
Safety and efficacy of ulnar artery approach for percutaneous cardiac catheterization: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jun;91(7):1273-1280. doi: 10.1002/ccd.27479. Epub 2018 Feb 1. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018. PMID: 29388387
Cited by
-
Patient Characteristics and Outcomes of Radial to Femoral Access-Site Crossover.J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025 Jan 21;4(1):102450. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2024.102450. eCollection 2025 Jan. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025. PMID: 40061409 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy and safety of kaolin-based hemostatic pad vs. standard mechanical compression following transradial and transulnar access for elective coronary angiography and PCI: RAUL trial substudy.Heart Vessels. 2020 Apr;35(4):502-508. doi: 10.1007/s00380-019-01520-z. Epub 2019 Oct 26. Heart Vessels. 2020. PMID: 31655876 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Best practices for vascular arterial access and closure: a contemporary guide for the cardiac catheterization laboratory.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Mar 14;11:1349480. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1349480. eCollection 2024. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024. PMID: 38550517 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The initial experience of 2495 cases of the ulnar artery as default access for coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures at a single center: An observational study.Indian Heart J. 2020 May-Jun;72(3):184-188. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2020.05.010. Epub 2020 Jun 14. Indian Heart J. 2020. PMID: 32768018 Free PMC article.
-
Arterial access and arteriotomy site closure devices.Nat Rev Cardiol. 2016 Nov;13(11):641-650. doi: 10.1038/nrcardio.2016.133. Epub 2016 Aug 25. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2016. PMID: 27558003 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous