Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background and Aim: In patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), the benefits associated with radial access compared with the femoral access approach remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term eviden...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gani Bajraktari, Zarife Rexhaj, Shpend Elezi, Fjolla Zhubi-Bakija, Artan Bajraktari, Ibadete Bytyçi, Arlind Batalli, Michael Y. Henein
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-05-01
Series:Journal of Clinical Medicine
Subjects:
PCI
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/10/2163
id doaj-bad54921396d49fe9cfbb8abd56917c3
record_format Article
spelling doaj-bad54921396d49fe9cfbb8abd56917c32021-06-01T00:14:36ZengMDPI AGJournal of Clinical Medicine2077-03832021-05-01102163216310.3390/jcm10102163Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsGani Bajraktari0Zarife Rexhaj1Shpend Elezi2Fjolla Zhubi-Bakija3Artan Bajraktari4Ibadete Bytyçi5Arlind Batalli6Michael Y. Henein7Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 90187 Umeå, SwedenClinic of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Kosova, 10000 Prishtina, KosovoClinic of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Kosova, 10000 Prishtina, KosovoClinic of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Kosova, 10000 Prishtina, KosovoDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 90187 Umeå, SwedenDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 90187 Umeå, SwedenClinic of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Kosova, 10000 Prishtina, KosovoDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, 90187 Umeå, SwedenBackground and Aim: In patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), the benefits associated with radial access compared with the femoral access approach remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term evidence-based clinical outcome of the two approaches. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing radial versus femoral access for CA and PCI. We identified 34 RCTs with 29,352 patients who underwent CA and/or PCI and compared 14,819 patients randomized for radial access with 14,533 who underwent procedures using femoral access. The follow-up period for clinical outcome was 30 days in all studies. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a fixed-effect or a random-effect model, as appropriate. Risk ratios (RRs) were used for efficacy and safety outcomes.Results: Compared with femoral access, the radial access was associated with significantly lower risk for all-cause mortality (RR: 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61 to 0.88; <i>p</i> = 0.001), major bleeding (RR: 0.53; 95% CI:0.43 to 0.65; <i>p</i> ˂ 0.00001), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)(RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.91; <i>p</i> = 0.0002), and major vascular complications (RR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.48; <i>p</i> ˂ 0.00001). These results were consistent irrespective of the clinical presentation of ACS or STEMI. Conclusions: Radial access in patients undergoing CA with or without PCI is associated with lower mortality, MACE, major bleeding and vascular complications, irrespective of clinical presentation, ACS or STEMI, compared with femoral access.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/10/2163femoralradialcoronarographyPCIacute coronary syndromestable coronary artery disease
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gani Bajraktari
Zarife Rexhaj
Shpend Elezi
Fjolla Zhubi-Bakija
Artan Bajraktari
Ibadete Bytyçi
Arlind Batalli
Michael Y. Henein
spellingShingle Gani Bajraktari
Zarife Rexhaj
Shpend Elezi
Fjolla Zhubi-Bakija
Artan Bajraktari
Ibadete Bytyçi
Arlind Batalli
Michael Y. Henein
Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Journal of Clinical Medicine
femoral
radial
coronarography
PCI
acute coronary syndrome
stable coronary artery disease
author_facet Gani Bajraktari
Zarife Rexhaj
Shpend Elezi
Fjolla Zhubi-Bakija
Artan Bajraktari
Ibadete Bytyçi
Arlind Batalli
Michael Y. Henein
author_sort Gani Bajraktari
title Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort radial access for coronary angiography carries fewer complications compared with femoral access: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
publisher MDPI AG
series Journal of Clinical Medicine
issn 2077-0383
publishDate 2021-05-01
description Background and Aim: In patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), the benefits associated with radial access compared with the femoral access approach remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term evidence-based clinical outcome of the two approaches. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing radial versus femoral access for CA and PCI. We identified 34 RCTs with 29,352 patients who underwent CA and/or PCI and compared 14,819 patients randomized for radial access with 14,533 who underwent procedures using femoral access. The follow-up period for clinical outcome was 30 days in all studies. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a fixed-effect or a random-effect model, as appropriate. Risk ratios (RRs) were used for efficacy and safety outcomes.Results: Compared with femoral access, the radial access was associated with significantly lower risk for all-cause mortality (RR: 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61 to 0.88; <i>p</i> = 0.001), major bleeding (RR: 0.53; 95% CI:0.43 to 0.65; <i>p</i> ˂ 0.00001), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)(RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.91; <i>p</i> = 0.0002), and major vascular complications (RR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.48; <i>p</i> ˂ 0.00001). These results were consistent irrespective of the clinical presentation of ACS or STEMI. Conclusions: Radial access in patients undergoing CA with or without PCI is associated with lower mortality, MACE, major bleeding and vascular complications, irrespective of clinical presentation, ACS or STEMI, compared with femoral access.
topic femoral
radial
coronarography
PCI
acute coronary syndrome
stable coronary artery disease
url https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/10/2163
work_keys_str_mv AT ganibajraktari radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zariferexhaj radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT shpendelezi radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT fjollazhubibakija radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT artanbajraktari radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ibadetebytyci radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT arlindbatalli radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT michaelyhenein radialaccessforcoronaryangiographycarriesfewercomplicationscomparedwithfemoralaccessametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
_version_ 1721415447101833216