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
. 2020 Jul 20;10(7):e038042.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038042.

Complex Large-Bore Radial percutaneous coronary intervention: rationale of the COLOR trial study protocol

Thomas A Meijers #  1 , Adel Aminian #  2 , Koen Teeuwen  3 , Marleen van Wely  4 , Thomas Schmitz  5 , Maurits T Dirksen  6 , Rene J van der Schaaf  7 , Juan F Iglesias  8 , Pierfrancesco Agostoni  9 , Joseph Dens  10 , Paul Knaapen  11 , Sudhir Rathore  12 , Jan Paul Ottervanger  1 , Jan-Henk E Dambrink  1 , Vincent Roolvink  1 , A T Marcel Gosselink  1 , Renicus S Hermanides  1 , Niels van Royen  4 , Maarten A H van Leeuwen  13
Affiliations

Complex Large-Bore Radial percutaneous coronary intervention: rationale of the COLOR trial study protocol

Thomas A Meijers et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: The radial artery has become the standard access site for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in stable coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome, because of less access site related bleeding complications. Patients with complex coronary lesions are under-represented in randomised trials comparing radial with femoral access with regard to safety and efficacy. The femoral artery is currently the most applied access site in patients with complex coronary lesions, especially when large bore guiding catheters are required. With slender technology, transradial PCI may be increasingly applied in patients with complex coronary lesions when large bore guiding catheters are mandatory and might be a safer alternative as compared with the transfemoral approach.

Methods and analysis: A total of 388 patients undergoing complex PCI will be randomised to radial 7 French access with Terumo Glidesheath Slender (Terumo, Japan) or femoral 7 French access as comparator. The primary outcome is the incidence of the composite end point of clinically relevant access site related bleeding and/or vascular complications requiring intervention. Procedural success and major adverse cardiovascular events up to 1 month will also be compared between both groups.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for the study was granted by the local Ethics Committee at each recruiting center ('Medisch Ethische Toetsing Commissie Isala Zwolle', 'Commissie voor medische ethiek ZNA', 'Comité Medische Ethiek Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg', 'Comité d'éthique CHU-Charleroi-ISPPC', 'Commission cantonale d'éthique de la recherche CCER-Republique et Canton de Geneve', 'Ethik Kommission de Ärztekammer Nordrhein' and 'Riverside Research Ethics Committee'). The trial outcomes will be published in peer-reviewed journals of the concerned literature.

Trial registration number: NCT03846752.

Keywords: cardiology; coronary heart disease; coronary intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: MAHvL, AA and and JFI are consultants for Terumo. JFI and TS have received honoraria/speakers fee for Terumo, the other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Inclusion flow chart for the COLOR trial. Graphic representation of inclusion for the COLOR trial. BARC, bleeding academic research group; COLOR, Complex Large-Bore Radial PCI; LEFS, Lower Extremity Functional Scale; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; STEMI, ST elevation myocardial infarction.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ferrante G, Rao SV, Jüni P, et al. . Radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions across the entire spectrum of patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2016;9:1419–34. 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.04.014 - DOI - PubMed
    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 randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet 2011. - PubMed
    1. Valgimigli M, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, et al. . Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2018;392:835–48. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31714-8 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sousa-Uva M, Neumann FJ, Ahlsson A, et al. . ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2018;2019. - PubMed
    1. Santas E, Bodí V, Sanchis J, et al. . The left radial approach in daily practice. A randomized study comparing femoral and right and left radial approaches. Rev Española Cardiol 2009. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data