Radial Versus Femoral Approach in Women Undergoing Coronary Angiography: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00669806%3A_____%2F19%3A10400346" target="_blank" >RIV/00669806:_____/19:10400346 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11140/19:10400346

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=qKUgSGlevf" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=qKUgSGlevf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Radial Versus Femoral Approach in Women Undergoing Coronary Angiography: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Objectives. We sought to compare outcomes with radial vs femoral approach in female patients undergoing coronary angiography. Background. Women undergoing cardiac procedures have increased risk of bleeding and vascular complications, but are under-represented in randomized clinical trials [RCTs] involving coronary angiography. Methods. We performed a meta-analysis of RCTs comparing outcomes in women undergoing angiography with radial vs femoral approaches. The primary outcome was non-coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] related bleeding at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events [MACCE; a composite of death, stroke or myocardial infarction], vascular complications, procedure duration, and access-site crossover. Results. Four studies [n = 6041 female patients] met the inclusion criteria. In female patients undergoing coronary angiography, radial access decreased non-CABG related bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [Cl], 0.44-072; P&lt;.001], MACCE (OR, 073; 95% CI, 0.58-0.93; P=.01), vascular complications [OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.75; P&lt;.001] with no significant difference in procedure time [mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.97 to 0.89; P=.93). There was an increase in access-site crossover using the radial approach [OR, 2.86; 95% CI, 2.24-3.63; P&lt;.001]. Patients undergoing radial approach were more likely to prefer radial access for the next procedure [OR, 6.96; 95% CI, 5.70-8.50; P&lt;.001]. Conclusions. In female patients undergoing coronary angiography or intervention, the radial approach is associated with decreased bleeding, MACCE, and vascular complications. These data suggest that radial access should be the preferred approach for women.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Radial Versus Femoral Approach in Women Undergoing Coronary Angiography: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Popis výsledku anglicky

Objectives. We sought to compare outcomes with radial vs femoral approach in female patients undergoing coronary angiography. Background. Women undergoing cardiac procedures have increased risk of bleeding and vascular complications, but are under-represented in randomized clinical trials [RCTs] involving coronary angiography. Methods. We performed a meta-analysis of RCTs comparing outcomes in women undergoing angiography with radial vs femoral approaches. The primary outcome was non-coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] related bleeding at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events [MACCE; a composite of death, stroke or myocardial infarction], vascular complications, procedure duration, and access-site crossover. Results. Four studies [n = 6041 female patients] met the inclusion criteria. In female patients undergoing coronary angiography, radial access decreased non-CABG related bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [Cl], 0.44-072; P&lt;.001], MACCE (OR, 073; 95% CI, 0.58-0.93; P=.01), vascular complications [OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.75; P&lt;.001] with no significant difference in procedure time [mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.97 to 0.89; P=.93). There was an increase in access-site crossover using the radial approach [OR, 2.86; 95% CI, 2.24-3.63; P&lt;.001]. Patients undergoing radial approach were more likely to prefer radial access for the next procedure [OR, 6.96; 95% CI, 5.70-8.50; P&lt;.001]. Conclusions. In female patients undergoing coronary angiography or intervention, the radial approach is associated with decreased bleeding, MACCE, and vascular complications. These data suggest that radial access should be the preferred approach for women.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Invasive Cardiology

ISSN

1042-3931

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

31

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

11

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

6

Strana od-do

335-340

Kód UT WoS článku

000494299800005

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85074378504