Review Article
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Major Cardiovascular Outcomes for Radial Versus Femoral Access in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome
Abstract
Objectives: Radial artery access (RA) for left heart catheterization and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective. Despite consistent data showing less bleeding complications compared with femoral artery access (FA), it continues to be underused in the United States, particularly in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in whom aggressive anticoagulation and platelet inhibition regimens are needed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare major cardiovascular outcomes and safety endpoints in patients with ACS managed with PCI using radial versus femoral access.Methods: Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing RA versus FA in patients with ACS were analyzed. Our primary outcomes were mortality, major adverse cardiac event, major bleeding, and access-related complications. A fixed-effects model was used for the primary analyses.
Results: Fifteen randomized controlled trials and 17 cohort studies involving 44,854 patients with ACS were identified. Compared with FA, RA was associated with a reduction in major bleeding (odds ratio [OR] 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33–0.61, P < 0.001), access-related complications (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.18–0.39, P < 0.001), mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54–0.75, P < 0.001), and major adverse cardiac event (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57–0.85, P < 0.001). These significant reductions were consistent across different study designs and clinical presentations.
Conclusions: Based on this large meta-analysis, RA for primary PCI in the setting of ACS is associated with reduction in cardiac and safety endpoints when compared with FA in both urgent and elective procedures. This should encourage a wider adoption of this technique among centers and interventional cardiologists.
This content is limited to qualifying members.
Existing members, please login first
If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.
Purchase only this article ($25)
Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.
Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)
Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.
Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)
Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.
References
1. Louvard Y, Ludwig J, Lefevre T, et al. Transradial approach for coronary angioplasty in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: a dual-center registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;55:206-211.
2. Philippe F, Larrazet F, Meziane T, et al. Comparison of transradial vs. transfemoral approach in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction with primary angioplasty and abciximab. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:67-73.
3. Saito S, Tanaka S, Hiroe Y, et al. Comparative study on transradial approach vs. transfemoral approach in primary stent implantation for patients with acute myocardial infarction: results of the test for myocardial infarction by prospective unicenter randomization for access sites (TEMPURA) trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003;59:26-33.
4. Ziakas A, Klinke P, Mildenberger R, et al. Comparison of the radial and the femoral approaches in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2003;91:598-600.
5. Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GG, de Benedictis ML, 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 2004;44:349-356.
6. Doyle BJ, Ting HH, Bell MR, et al. Major femoral bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention: incidence, predictors, and impact on long-term survival among 17,901 patients treated at the Mayo Clinic from 1994 to 2005. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2008;1:202-209.
7. Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, et al. 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 2009;157:132-140.
8. Moscucci M, Fox KA, Cannon CP, et al. Predictors of major bleeding in acute coronary syndromes: the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Eur Heart J 2003;24:1815-1823.
9. Segev A, Strauss BH, Tan M, et al. Predictors and 1-year outcome of major bleeding in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: insights from the Canadian Acute Coronary Syndrome Registries. Am Heart J 2005;150:690-694.
10. Hamon M, Filippi-Codaccioni E, Riddell JW, et al. Prognostic impact of major bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndromes. A systematic review and meta-analysis. EuroIntervention 2007;3:400-408.
11. Manoukian SV, Feit F, Mehran R, et al. Impact of major bleeding on 30-day mortality and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:1362-1368.
12. Rao SV, Jollis JG, Harrington RA, et al. Relationship of blood transfusion and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2004;292:1555-1562.
13. Yang X, Alexander KP, Chen AY, et al. The implications of blood transfusions for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: results from the CRUSADE National Quality Improvement Initiative. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1490-1495.
14. Feldman DN, Swaminathan RV, Kaltenbach LA, 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 2013;127:2295-2306.
15. Subherwal S, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Temporal trends in and factors associated with bleeding complications among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data CathPCI Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1861-1869.
16. Caputo RP, Tremmel JA, Rao S, et al. Transradial arterial access for coronary and peripheral procedures: executive summary by the Transradial Committee of the SCAI. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011;78:823-839.
17. Hamon M, Pristipino C, Di Mario C, et al. Consensus document on the radial approach in percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: position paper by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Working Groups on Acute Cardiac Care** and Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology. EuroIntervention 2013;8:1242-1251.
18. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
19. Baklanov DV, Kaltenbach LA, Marso SP, et al. The prevalence and outcomes of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: analysis from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (2007 to 2011). J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:420-426.
20. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001;323:42-46.
21. Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analysis. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed October 26, 2015.
22. Hannan EL. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies: guidelines for assessing respective strengths and limitations. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2008;1:211-217.
23. DerSimonian R, Kacker R. Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: an update. Contemp Clin Trials 2007;28:105-114.
24. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557-560.
25. Brasselet C, Tassan S, Nazeyrollas P, et al. Randomised comparison of femoral versus radial approach for percutaneous coronary intervention using abciximab in acute myocardial infarction: results of the FARMI trial. Heart 2007;93:1556-1561.
26. Gan L, Lib Q, Liuc R, et al. Effectiveness and feasibility of transradial approaches for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Nanjing Med Univ 2009;23:270-274.
27. Hou L, Wei YD, Li WM, et al. Comparative study on transradial versus transfemoral approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in Chinese patients with acute myocardial infarction. Saudi Med J 2010;31:158-162.
28. Li WM, Li Y, Zhao JY, et al. Safety and feasibility of emergent percutaneous coronary intervention with the transradial access in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Chin Med J (Engl) 2007;120:598-600.
29. Mann T, Cubeddu G, Bowen J, et al. Stenting in acute coronary syndromes: a comparison of radial versus femoral access sites. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;32:572-576.
30. Koltowski L, Filipiak KJ, Kochman J, et al. Access for percutaneous coronary intervention in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: radial vs. femoral--a prospective, randomised clinical trial (OCEAN RACE). Kardiol Pol 2014;72:604-611.
31. Cantor WJ, Puley G, Natarajan MK, et al. Radial versus femoral access for emergent percutaneous coronary intervention with adjunct glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in acute myocardial infarction--the RADIAL-AMI pilot randomized trial. Am Heart J 2005;150:543-549.
32. Chodor P, Krupa H, Kurek T, et al. RADIal versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction (RADIAMI): a prospective, randomized, single-center clinical trial. Cardiol J 2009;16:332-340.
33. Chodor P, Kurek T, Kowalczuk A, et al. Radial vs femoral approach with StarClose clip placement for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. RADIAMI II: a prospective, randomised, single centre trial. Kardiol Pol 2011;69:763-771.
34. 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 2012;60:2481-2489.
35. Jolly SS, 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 2011;377:1409-1420.
36. Bernat I, Horak D, Stasek J, et al. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by radial or femoral approach in a multicenter randomized clinical trial: the STEMI-RADIAL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:964-972.
37. Wang YB, Fu XH, Wang XC, et al. Randomized comparison of radial versus femoral approach for patients with STEMI undergoing early PCI following intravenous thrombolysis. J Invasive Cardiol 2012;24:412-416.
38. Yan ZX, Zhou YJ, Zhao YX, et al. Safety and feasibility of transradial approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. Chin Med J (Engl) 2008;121:782-786.
39. Arzamendi D, Ly HQ, Tanguay JF, et al. Effect on bleeding, time to revascularization, and one-year clinical outcomes of the radial approach during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2010;106:148-154.
40. Diaz de la Llera LS, Fournier Andray JA, Gomez Moreno S, et al. [Transradial approach for percutaneous coronary stenting in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction]. Rev Esp Cardiol 2004;57:732-736 [in Spanish] .
41. Siudak Z, Zawislak B, Dziewierz A, et al. Transradial approach in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with abciximab results in fewer bleeding complications: data from EUROTRANSFER registry. Coron Artery Dis 2010;21:292-297.
42. Hamon M, Mehta S, Steg PG, et al. Impact of transradial and transfemoral coronary interventions on bleeding and net adverse clinical events in acute coronary syndromes. EuroIntervention 2011;7:91-97.
43. Hetherington SL, Adam Z, Morley R, et al. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: changing patterns of vascular access, radial versus femoral artery. Heart 2009;95:1612-1618.
44. Genereux P, Mehran R, Palmerini T, et al. Radial access in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the HORIZONS-AMI trial. EuroIntervention 2011;7:905-916.
45. Ibebuogu UN, Cercek B, Makkar R, et al. Comparison between transradial and transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2012;110:1262-1265.
46. Kajiya T, Agahari F, Wai KL, et al. A single-center experience of transitioning from a routine transfemoral to a transradial intervention approach in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Impact on door-to-balloon time and clinical outcomes. J Cardiol 2013;62:12-17.
47. Klutstein MW, Westerhout CM, Armstrong PW, et al. Radial versus femoral access, bleeding and ischemic events in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome managed with an invasive strategy. Am Heart J 2013;165:583-590.e1.
48. Qin X, Xiong W, Wang L, et al. Clinical investigation of transradial access for emergent percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Clin Interv Aging 2013;8:1139-1142.
49. Secco GG, Marinucci L, Uguccioni L, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral approach for primary percutaneous coronary interventions in elderly patients. J Invasive Cardiol 2013;25:254-256.
50. Gellen B, Lesault PF, Canoui-Poitrine F, et al. Feasibility limits of transradial primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction in the real life (TRAP-AMI). Int J Cardiol 2013;168:1056-1061.
51. Valsecchi O, Musumeci G, Vassileva A, et al. Safety, feasibility and efficacy of transradial primary angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Ital Heart J 2003;4:329-334.
52. Weaver AN, Henderson RA, Gilchrist IC, et al. Arterial access and door-to-balloon times for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2010;75:695-699.
53. Yip HK, Chung SY, Chai HT, et al. Safety and efficacy of transradial vs transfemoral arterial primary coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: single-center experience. Circ J 2009;73:2050-2055.
