Article citationsMore>>

Mizuguchi, Y., Izumikawa, T., Hashimoto, S., Yamada, T., Taniguchi, N., Nakajima, S., Takahashi, A., et al. (2019) Efficacy and Safety of the Distal Transradial Approach in Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Japanese Multicenter Experience. Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics, 24, 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-019-00590-0

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Transradial Approach versus Anatomical Snuff Box Distal Radial Access for Coronary Procedures

  AUTHORS: Saeed Shalaby Montaser, Ahmed Mohamed Emara, Shehab Adel Eletriby, Ahmed A. Tawfeek

  KEYWORDS: Radial Artery, SnuffBox, Catheterization

  JOURNAL NAME: World Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases, Vol.10 No.10, October 26, 2020

  ABSTRACT: Background: Radial artery catheterization is a fundamental approach that is used as a procedural access in the different catheterization laboratories so our study is a comparison between distal radial artery approach and convential traditional transradial approach to explore the fesibility and safety of coronary angiography and percutanous coronary. Aim of the Work: The purpose of our study is a comparison between the conventional transradial approach versus distal transradial approach for diagnostic and interventional coronary procedures. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective study that included 60 patients who presented to the Cardiology departments in Ahmed Maher Teaching Hospital from December 2018 until October 2019 to perform planned Transradial Coronary Angiography and/or coronary intervention. The study is divided into two groups, group (A) included 30 patients who undergone the procedure through the distal radial approach (The Anatomical Snuffbox)and group (B) included 30 patients who undergone the procedure through the traditional Transradial approach. Results: Thrombosis and hospital stay are higher significant in radial group than distal radial group and patient satisfaction is higher significant in distal radial group than traditional Transradial while there is no significant difference between both groups as regard Success and failure rate of cannulation, bleeding, infection and duration of the procedure. Conclusion: coronary procedures by distal radial approach have minor access complication versus the conventional Transradial approach.