Gaining a New Skill With the Risk of Losing One: The Effect of Radial Catheterization

Current Problems in Cardiology

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 195-203

  Bolorunduro, Oluwaseyi ^a   Bob Manuel, Tamunoinemi ^a   Cheema, Yaser ^a   Raza, Askari ^a   Khouzam, Rami ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARDIOLOGIST; CARDIOLOGY; COMFORT; COMMUNITY PROGRAM; FEMUR; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; SKILL; STRESS; TRAINING; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSITY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; EDUCATION; FEMORAL ARTERY; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; MEDICAL EDUCATION; PROCEDURES; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RADIAL ARTERY; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TRENDS;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CARDIAC CATHETERIZATION; CARDIOLOGY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, GRADUATE; FEMORAL ARTERY; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HUMANS; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RADIAL ARTERY; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84992337691     PISSN: 01462806     EISSN: 15356280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2016.07.001     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. 1 Rao, S.V., Ou, F.S., Wang, T.Y., et al. Trends in the prevalence and outcomes of radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 1 (2008), 379–386.
2. 2 Feldman, D.N., Swaminathan, R.V., Kaltenbach, L.A., et al. Adoption of radial access and comparison of outcomes to femoral access in percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (2007–2012). Circulation 127 (2013), 2295–2306.
3. 3 Jolly, S.S., Yusuf, S., Cairns, J., et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet 377 (2011), 1409–1420.
4. 4 Karrowni, W., Vyas, A., Giacomino, B., et al. Radial versus femoral access for primary percutaneous interventions in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 6 (2013), 814–823.
5. 5 Romagnoli, E., Biondi-Zoccai, G., Sciahbasi, A., et al. Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 60 (2012), 2481–2489.
6. 6 Jolly, S.S., Amlani, S., Hamon, M., Yusuf, S., Mehta, S.R., Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am Heart J 157 (2009), 132–140.
7. 7 Agostoni, P., Biondi-Zoccai, G.G., de Benedictis, M.L., et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures: systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 44 (2004), 349–356.
8. 8 Roffi, M., Patrono, C., Collet, J.P., et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: task force for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 37 (2016), 267–315.
9. 9 Caputo, R.P., Tremmel, J.A., Rao, S., et al. Transradial arterial access for coronary and peripheral procedures: executive summary by the Transradial Committee of the SCAI. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 78 (2011), 823–839.
10. 10 Gutierrez, A., Tsai, T.T., Stanislawski, M.A., et al. Adoption of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention and outcomes according to center radial volume in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare system: insights from the Veterans Affairs clinical assessment, reporting, and tracking (CART) program. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 6 (2013), 336–346.
11. 11 Azzalini, L., Tosin, K., Chabot-Blanchet, M., et al. The benefits conferred by radial access for cardiac catheterization are offset by a paradoxical increase in the rate of vascular access site complications with femoral access: the Campeau Radial Paradox. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 8 (2015), 1854–1864.
12. 12 Shah, R., Gardner, J.D., Radial versus femoral access for cardiac catheterisation. Lancet 386 (2015), 2392–2393.
13. 13 Hess, C.N., Peterson, E.D., Neely, M.L., et al. The learning curve for transradial percutaneous coronary intervention among operators in the United States: a study from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation 129 (2014), 2277–2286.
14. 14 Abbott, J.D., The pace of transradial procedural learning. Circulation 129 (2014), 2250–2252.
15. 15 King, S.B. 3rd, Babb, J.D., Bates, E.R., et al. COCATS 4 Task Force 10: training in cardiac catheterization. J Am Coll Cardiol 65 (2015), 1844–1853.
16. 16 Rao, S.V., Hess, C.N., Barham, B., et al. A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 7 (2014), 857–867.