Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Sep;25(5):368-374.
doi: 10.5152/dir.2019.18437.

Operator learning curve for transradial liver cancer embolization: implications for the initiation of a transradial access program

Affiliations

Operator learning curve for transradial liver cancer embolization: implications for the initiation of a transradial access program

Roberto Iezzi et al. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2019 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to analyze transradial access (TRA) learning curve on patients undergoing hepatic chemoembolization, investigating the relationship between procedural volumes and various benchmarks of procedural success.

Methods: We enrolled 60 consecutive patients who received two unilobar hepatic chemoembolizations within a 4-week interval performed by a single interventional radiologist, highly-trained in conventional transfemoral access (TFA) procedures, but without any previous practical experience in TRA procedures and with a preliminary 2-day theoretical training only. Consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled and analyzed in 3 groups: A (cases 1 to 20), B (cases 21 to 40), and C (cases 41 to 60). All patients underwent one hepatic chemoembolization using TRA and the other one using TFA in random order. All TFA procedures performed by the same operator in the same series of patients were considered as the control group. Primary endpoint was to analyze the relationship between TRA procedure operator experience and benchmarks of procedural success, to define the optimal procedural learning curve.

Results: Technical success was obtained in all patients, with a crossover rate (radial to femoral access) of 0%. An association between incremental TRA operator experience (in terms of performed procedures) and decrease of preparation, puncture, fluoroscopy, and total examination times was observed. Similarly, inverse associations between incremental TRA operator experience and contrast medium (CM) volumes (P < 0.001) and radiation dose (RD) values (in terms of RAK - Reference Air Kerma) (P < 0.001) were also observed. Compared with TFA, CM volumes and RD values were significantly higher only in group A (cases 1-20). Procedure success remained high in all TRA groups and no significant association between TRA incremental experience and postprocedural outcomes was found. Higher postprocedural complaints at the access route and more limitations in performing basic activities were recorded after TFA vs. TRA (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: TRA catheterizations can be safely performed in patients treated for liver cancer embolization after a relatively short training in controlled conditions and with a better performance in comparison with TFA. Operator proficiency improves with greater TRA experience, with a threshold needed to overcome the learning curve represented by about 20 procedures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest disclosure

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure
Figure
Angiographic and procedural variables. RAK, reference air kerma; TRA, transradial artery access; TFA, transfemoral artery access..

References

    1. Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomized, parallel group, multicenter trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–1420. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shiozawa S, Tsuchiya A, Endo S, et al. Transradial approach for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison with conventional transfemoral approach. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2003;37:412–417. doi: 10.1097/00004836-200311000-00013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kis B, Mills M, Hoffe SE. Hepatic radioembolization from transradial access: initial experience and comparison to transfemoral access. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22:444–449. doi: 10.5152/dir.2016.15571. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bishay VL, Biederman DM, Ward TJ, et al. Transradial approach for hepatic radioembolization: initial results and technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207:1112–1121. doi: 10.2214/AJR.15.15615. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wu T, Sun R, Huang Y, et al. Transradial arterial chemoembolization reduces complications and costs in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Indian J Cancer. 2015;52:e107–111. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.172505. - DOI - PubMed