title: Comparison on the efficacy and the safety of transradial approach versus conventional transfemoral approach for cardiac catheterization procedures.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the efficacy and safety of transradial approach (TR) and conventional transfemoral approach (TF) for cardiac catheterization procedures.
  
  
  METHODS
  The data were collected retrospectively of all patients that received cardiac catheterization at Thammasat University Cardiac Center between September 1, 2010 and August 31, 2011 (the first year ofTR approach).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Cardiac catheterization was performed on 597 patients. TR approach was performed about one-sixth of all procedures compared to conventional TF approach, 93 (15.58%) vs. 504 (84.42%). Safety of TR approach at the beginning was similar to conventional TF approach including in-hospital complication rate 5.4% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.788, volume of contrast media used 90.63±66.83 vs. 97.89±64.52 milliliters, p = 0.323, radiation exposure defined as median/min-max estimate skin entrance radiation dose 833.35/133.15-8,913.42 vs. 910.00/76.78-13,719.88 mGy, p = 0.599, and dose-area product 63.03/7.87-494.52 vs. 70.85/5.77-829.16 Gy x cm2, p = 0.586. The efficacy defined as procedural success rate was significantly higher in the conventional TF approach 90.3% vs. 97.8%, p = 0.001, as well as the procedural time that showed insignificantly longer 54.03±39.40 vs. 47.37?39.86 minutes, p = 0.139. This statistical diference in the procedural success rate was clear only in the first 62 TR. After this learning curve period, the procedural success rate was similar 96.8% vs. 97.6%, p = 0.575. Both the procedural success rate and the procedural time in TR approach showed trend to achieve better outcomes according to the increasing number of TRprocedures; 87.1% vs. 87.1% vs. 96.8%, p = 0.331 and 64.68±51.90 vs. 52.45±31.94 vs. 44.97±29.04 minutes, p = 0.139 in the first 31 vs. the 32nd to the 62nd, and the 63rd to the 93" cases respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The safety of the transradial approach for cardiac catheterization procedures was similar to conventional transfemoral approach. The learning curve period was needed but its length is acceptable before the same efficacy rate as the conventional transfemoral procedure was achieved.
authors.forename: Pitha
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Promlikitchai
authors.forename: Dilok
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Piyayotai
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D002406:Catheterization, Peripheral / Q000009:adverse effects*; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000628:therapy*; D005260:Female; D005263:Femoral Artery; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017534:Radial Artery; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome