Radial Versus Femoral Access for Acute Coronary Syndromes.
The feasibility and safety of transradial coronary intervention was demonstrated soon after the description of the transfemoral approach, despite which the use of the femoral artery still dominates in acute coronary syndrome intervention. The advantages of using the radial artery are virtual elimination of access site complications and an important reduction in bleeding, both of which are of utmost importance to the patient with myocardial infarction. Randomised controlled trials have now documented what seems inherent; that transradial intervention should bring with it an advantage in terms of morbidity and mortality in this cohort. The potential disadvantages in terms of speed of procedure and radiation exposure are negated by operator experience. Registries have illustrated that conversion on a large scale from the femoral to the transradial approach is safe and saves lives, most convincingly so in acute coronary syndrome intervention. This review discusses the potential benefits and risks of the alternative access sites in acute patients and explores how these are borne out in the published data.
Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK. helenroutledge@me.com.
Helen
H
Routledge
Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Sanjay
S
Sastry
D054058:Acute Coronary Syndrome / Q000628:therapy*; D006328:Cardiac Catheterization / Q000379:methods*; D017023:Coronary Angiography; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005263:Femoral Artery / Q000473:pathology*; D006801:Humans; D062645:Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / Q000379:methods*; D010975:Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors / Q000627:therapeutic use; D017534:Radial Artery / Q000473:pathology*; D012042:Registries; D018570:Risk Assessment; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D010975:Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors
ACS; Bleeding; PCI; Radial