Acute Hand Ischemia and Digital Amputation After Transradial Coronary Intervention in a Patient With CREST Syndrome

The radial artery approach for coronary angiography and intervention is rapidly replacing the femoral artery approach, largely because it reduces bleeding and vascular access site complications. However, complications associated with transradial access warrant attention, notably radial artery occlusion. This report focuses on a case of radial artery occlusion after percutaneous coronary intervention in a 46-year-old woman with CREST (calcinosis, Raynaud phenomenon, esophageal dysfunction, sclerodactyly, and telangiectasia) syndrome, which ultimately led to acute hand ischemia necessitating amputation of her middle and index fingers.     

Long term clinical outcomes after deployment of femoral vascular closure devices in coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention

Background: We evaluated the long term clinical outcomes of femoral vascular closure devices following its deployment in coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures. Methods: From June 2000 to September 2004, 265 patients who received femoral vascular closure devices after coronary angiography and PCIs were enrolled into the study. Patients' medical records were reviewed and vascular complications within 1 year of follow‐up period were recorded. Rutherford's categories of claudication were used to quantify different degrees of claudication and leg ischaemia. Duplex ultrasonography of both femoral arteries (using the nonaccessed site as control) was performed at 1 year after deployment of vascular closure devices. Vessel diameter and flow velocities for both common femoral arteries were obtained. Results: There was no occurrence of late vascular complications like arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, surgical repair of access site complications, late groin bleeding and infection. By Rutherford categories of claudication, 99.2% of patients had grade 0 claudication while the remaining 0.8% was in grade 1. By arterial Duplex ultrasonography, the peak systolic velocity of the accessed femoral artery (predominantly right side) was nonsignificantly higher, 94.9 ± 26.0 cm/s when compared to 91.5 ± 24.8 cm/s in the control site (P = 0.12). As for vessel diameter, no significant difference was found in the mean end‐diastolic vessel diameter 8.8 ± 1.3 mm (puncture site) versus 8.7 ± 4.4 mm (control site) (P = 0.72). Conclusion: We found that the use of femoral closure devices was safe and it was not associated with any adverse long term vascular complications. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Novel oral anticoagulants in the treatment of radial artery occlusion

Transradial access of the vascular system for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention has become the primary approach in several cardiac catheterization laboratories across the world. The paradigm shift from transfemoral access has been driven by improved outcomes in patients undergoing these cardiac procedures by transradial access. Radial artery occlusion is the most common vascular complication of transradial coronary procedures. Only a few studies have reported on the optimal treatment of radial artery occlusion, with ulnar artery compression and anticoagulation, especially with low-molecular-weight heparin, having shown the best results. In this case series, four patients who were found to have evidence of post-cardiac catheterization radial artery occlusion on ultrasound imaging were treated with a 30-day course of apixaban. Three of the four patients showed complete resolution of radial artery occlusion with addition of apixaban to current standard therapeutic strategies. This case series shows that treatment with novel oral anticoagulants can be an alternative and more convenient option compared to subcutaneous injection of low-molecular heparin for anticoagulation in patients with post-coronary angiography radial artery occlusion.     

Transradial cardiac catheterization: A Review of Access Site Complications

Transradial catheterization (TRC) has been associated with a lower incidence of major access site related complications as compared to the transfemoral approach. With the increased adoption of transradial access, it is essential to understand the potential major and minor complications of TRC. The most common complication is asymptomatic radial artery occlusion, which rarely leads to clinical events, owing to the dual collateral perfusion of the hand. Adequate anticoagulation, appropriate compression techniques, and smaller sheath size can minimize the risk of radial artery occlusion. Hand ischemia with necrosis has never been reported during TRC with thorough pre‐examination of intact collateral circulation. Radial artery spasm is relatively common, and can result in access and procedural failure. It can be prevented by the use of vasodilator cocktails and hydrophilic sheaths. Radial artery perforation can lead to severe forearm hematoma and compartment syndrome if not managed promptly. Careful observation, prompt detection of the hematoma, and management with a pressure bandage dressing are critical to avoid serious complications. Pseudoaneurym and arteriovenous fistula are rare complications, which can likely be managed conservatively without surgical intervention. Nerve injury occurring during access has been reported. Close observation for improvement is necessary, although symptoms usually improve over time. In summary, to prevent access site complications, avoidance of multiple punctures, gentle catheter manipulation, use of guided compression, coupled with careful observation for adverse warning signs such as hematoma, loss of pulse, pain, are critical for safe and effective TRC. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Successful removal of an entrapped and kinked catheter during right transradial cardiac catheterization by snaring and unwinding the catheter via femoral access

Since its introduction by Campeau in 1989, the transradial approach for coronary angiography has gained significant popularity among interventional cardiologists due to its lower access site complication rates, cost-effectiveness, and shorter hospital course. Although the transradial approach is much safer than the transfemoral approach, it has its own inherent rare complications including radial artery occlusion, thrombosis, nonocclusive radial artery injury, vasospasm, and compartment syndrome. Herein, we present an unusual case of entrapment and kinking of a catheter in the radial artery, which was successfully removed by using a gooseneck snare via the transfemoral route. The distal and proximal tips were then simultaneously rotated in opposite directions, allowing for the unkinking and removal of the catheter. To our knowledge, this is the first report of this rare complication.     

Rapid cycle change to predominantly radial access coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention

Objectives : This study sought to evaluate the safety and feasibility of all operators at a single center changing from predominantly femoral to radial access for coronary percutaneous procedures. Background : The radial artery is currently regarded as a useful vascular access site for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The reduction in local vascular access complications is thought to be a major advantage of the radial route. Despite this, the technique is used less frequently possibly reflecting concerns by cardiologists about the feasibility of using radial access as a preferred option. Methods : A retrospective study of 1004 consecutive patients who underwent coronary angiography with or without PCI was analyzed. Procedure details and clinical outcomes were assessed according to the radial or femoral approaches. Results : The success rate for cardiac catheterization via the radial approach was 97.4% (815/837) and the femoral approach was 98.8% (165/167). The procedural failure rate for radial access was not different from the femoral route [2.6% vs. 1.2%; odds ratio (OR), 2.26; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53–9.71; P = 0.41]. Major access site complications occurred in 0.25% patients in the radial group compared with 4.8% patients in the femoral group [OR, 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01–0.23); P < 0.0001]. Conclusions : The radial approach has a high rate of success and is associated with fewer major local vascular access site complications than the femoral route. These results can be achieved early in the operator learning curve of low to medium volume operators. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Ulnar artery catheterization with occlusion of corresponding radial artery.

The transradial approach to coronary angiography has become a popular technique. Because of potential advantages, the transulnar approach has also recently been described. We report a successful case of transulnar catheterization with documented occlusion of the radial artery and normal inverse Allen test in a patient with limited vascular access.     

Heparin-free distal radial artery approach to cardiac catheterisation and the small radial recurrent artery

Radial artery access has transformed cardiac catheterisation, allowing it to be performed in a daycase setting, saving both hospital beds, and nursing care costs. However, there are two common and seemingly diametrically opposite complications. These are radial artery occlusion and forearm haematoma; the former could be reduced by heparin, but at the expense of precipitating the latter. These complications increase proportionally to the size of radial artery sheath used. Interestingly, by cannulating the radial artery more distally beyond its bifurcation in the hand, the distal radial approach appears to be the ‘one stone, two birds’ or the synchronous Chinese idiom, ‘yīshí’èrniăo’s’ solution, reducing both complications at the same time. Extending this further and downsizing to a 4Fr catheter system, heparin use could be spared altogether, without complications, and haemostasis achieved with short manual pressure at the puncture site. Hence, further cost savings by foregoing commercial compression bands, and abolishing access site care for nurses. We illustrate the above strategy in a patient with challenging radial anatomy, made simple and easy.Key words: coronary angiography, distal radial artery, haemostasis, heparin, radial artery occlusion     

Transulnar versus transradial artery approach for coronary angioplasty: the PCVI-CUBA study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare in terms of efficacy and safety the transulnar to the transradial approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty. Background: Opposite to the transradial approach, which is now widely used in catheterization laboratories worldwide, the ulnar artery approach is rarely used for cardiac catheterization. METHODS: Diagnostic coronarography, followed or not by angioplasty, was performed by transulnar or transradial approach, chosen at random. A positive (normal) direct or reverse Allen's test was required before tempting the radial or the ulnar approach, respectively. MACE were recorded till 1-month follow-up. Doppler ultrasound assessment of the forearm vessels was scheduled for all the angioplastied patients. RESULTS: Successful access was obtained in 93.1% of patients in the ulnar group (n = 216), and in 95.5% of patients in the radial group (n = 215), P = NS. One hundred and three and 105 angioplasty procedures were performed in 94 and 95 patients in ulnar and radial group, with success in 95.2% and 96.2% of procedures in ulnar and radial group, respectively (P = NS). Freedom from MACE at 1-month follow-up was observed in 93 patients in both groups (97.8% for ulnar group and 95.8% for radial group), P = NS. Asymptomatic access site artery occlusion occurred in 5.7% of patients after transulnar and in 4.7% of patients after transradial angioplasty. A big forearm hematoma, and a little A-V fistula were observed, each in one patient, in the ulnar group. CONCLUSION: The transulnar approach for diagnostic and therapeutic coronary interventions is a safe and effective alternative to the transradial approach, as both techniques share a high success rate and an extremely low incidence of entry site complications. The transulnar approach has the potential to spare injury to the radial artery in anticipation of its use as a coronary bypass conduit.     

Transulnar cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention: techniques,transradial comparisons,anatomical considerations,and comprehensive literature review

Ulnar arterial access for cardiac catheterization and intervention is an alternative approach compared with radial or femoral access. Ulnar access is infrequently performed since the radial artery is readily palpable and is commonly used worldwide to minimize vascular complications from femoral access. Nevertheless, ulnar access provides a suitable access site in patients who are poor candidates for femoral access, have pre‐existing radial occlusion, radial artery hypoplasia or hyperplasia from prior radial artery procedures, radial stenosis, radial loops, radial tortuosity, small radial arteries, and/or have future need for radial graft for dialysis or coronary artery bypass graft. Furthermore, femoral access is the standard default option if radial access fails. Consequently, learning ulnar access provides a suitable forearm alternative to avoid femoral access when deemed high risk or undesirable. This review discusses the techniques of ulnar access, advantages and disadvantages of ulnar versus radial access, the clinical trials on ulnar cardiac catheterization and its associated complications.     

Transradial right and left heart catheterizations: a comparison to traditional femoral approach.

OBJECTIVES: This study compares the transradial versus transfemoral approach to combined right- and left-heart catheterization. BACKGROUND: Central venous access from peripheral veins has been a historically useful technique. Although the need for right-heart catheterization has been considered an exclusion for transradial catheterization, we have combined a peripheral approach to the central venous system with radial arterial access which permits bilateral heart catheterization using a transradial approach. METHODS: Over an 18-month period all right-heart catheterizations done in conjunction with arterial access were reviewed. Salvage procedures, mixed site access, and biopsy procedures were excluded. Radial procedures were performed using radial artery access and a forearm vein. Femoral procedures used femoral artery/vein. Demographics, procedural information, and postprocedural complications including those requiring vascular ultrasound or transfusion were recorded and used for comparison between groups. RESULTS: Total of 175 femoral/105 radial cases done by 4 operators met criteria for comparison. Both groups had similar procedural indications and age. Procedural durations were shorter (P < .01) with radial 70 +/- 5.0 min (+/-95% CI) vs. femoral 75 +/- 5.4 min (+/-95% CI). Crossover was noted in several patients from both groups; radial procedures (n = 2) failed due to previous shoulder trauma. Femoral crossover to radial involved difficult arterial access. Complications related to access site occurred in 12 femoral and 0 radial patients. CONCLUSIONS: Using the forearm for central venous access appears safer than using the femoral vessels. Transradial catheterizations can be done in combination with forearm venous access procedures with excellent results and enhanced patient safety.     

Feasibility of complex coronary and peripheral interventions by trans‐radial approach using large sheaths

Background : Trans‐radial approach (TRA) reduces vascular access‐site complications but has some technical limitations. Usually, TRA procedures are performed using 5 Fr or 6 Fr sheaths, whereas complex interventions requiring larger sheaths are approached by trans‐femoral access. Methods : During 4 years, at two Institutions with high TRA use, we have attempted to perform selected complex coronary or peripheral interventions by TRA using sheaths larger than 6 Fr. Clinical and procedural data were prospectively collected. Attempt to place a 7 Fr or 8 Fr sheath (according to the planned strategy of the procedure) was performed after 5–6 Fr sheath insertion, administration of intra‐arterial nitrates and radial artery angiography. Late (>3 months) patency of the radial artery was checked (by angiography in the case of repeated procedures or by palpation + reverse Allen test). Results : We collected 60 patients in which TRA large sheath insertion was attempted. The large sheath (87% 7 Fr, 13% 8 Fr) was successfully placed in all cases. Most of the procedures were complex coronary interventions (bifurcated or highly thrombotic or calcific chronic total occlusive lesions), whereas 8.3% were carotid interventions. Procedural success rate was 98.3% (1 failure to reopen a chronic total occlusion). No access‐site related complication occurred. In 57 (95%) patients, late radial artery patency was assessed and showed patency in 90% of the cases, the remaining patients having asymptomatic collateralized occlusion. Conclusions : In selected patients, complex percutaneous interventions requiring 7–8 Fr sheaths can be successfully performed by RA approach without access‐site clinical consequences. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Transradial versus transfemoral approach for percutaneous coronary procedures

Selective coronary angiography was originally performed through open brachial arteriotomy. Thereafter, the percutaneous Seldinger technique and the use of preformed Judkins-type catheters popularized the femoral approach. More recently, after the first report of successful coronary angiography by the transradial approach in 1989, the radial artery has been increasingly used as an alternative access site. The main advantage offered by the transradial approach is represented by the very low (< 1%) incidence of relevant vascular access site complications, which on the contrary occur in about 3% to 7% of patients undergoing procedures through the femoral route. The main disadvantage is a higher incidence of procedural failure that leads to a crossover to the femoral route. In this review, we examine the available evidence on transradial and transfemoral approach advantages, disadvantages, and complications in coronary angiography and intervention. Their use in the acute myocardial infarction setting and other situations is described. Vascular closure device usefulness is also considered.     

Novel technique of performing multivessel PCI through an Impella sheath

A 69‐year‐old woman with diabetes was found to have multi‐vessel coronary artery disease and underwent 5‐vessel coronary artery bypass grafting. Patient had persistent cardiogenic shock postoperatively despite intra‐aortic balloon pump and escalating pressor requirements. Electrocardiogram showed new ischemic changes and the patient was urgently taken to the catheterization lab for coronary angiography and placement of an Impella CP for higher degree of hemodynamic support via the left femoral artery. Due to limitations in vascular access the Impella CP sheath was utilized for vascular access for diagnostic angiography and coronary intervention concurrently with ongoing Impella CP support. The first obtuse marginal had severe proximal disease and was treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a drug eluting stent. To our knowledge, this case is the first in which successful diagnostic angiography as well as multi‐vessel PCI was performed via an Impella sheath while concurrently using the percutaneous mechanical circulatory support system of the Impella CP. Multiple guide catheters and a pigtail catheter were successfully passed via the Impella CP sheath to perform PCI. This novel method of vascular access could be an important tool to use in high‐risk patients with limitations in access sites and decrease potential bleeding complications by limiting the number of arterial punctures.     

Left radial approach for coronary angiography: Results of a prospective study

Although radial approach has been shown to be feasible for coronary angiography, angioplasty, and even stent placement, there have been no prospective evaluations of ease and safety of left radial approach for coronary angiogram. We examined procedural duration and success as well as complications in 415 consecutive patients. Radial artery occlusion was assessed immediately post-procedure and at 2 month follow-up using echo-Doppler measurements. Procedure failure rate was 9%, mean time for sheath insertion was 4.7 ± 4.7 min, and mean procedure duration was 19.1 ± 8.2 min. No major complications occurred. Asymptomatic radial artery occlusion was noted in 71% of the first 49 patients, decreased to 24% in the next 119 receiving 2,000–3,000 units of heparin, and to 4.3% in the last 210 receiving 5000 (p < 0.05). Comparison with the femoral approach in the same laboratory suggested that the radial approach took longer, but provided similarly high-quality results without great difficulty in coronary cannulation. Hence, the left radial approach for coronary angiography (with heparin administration) allows immediate ambulation and may be especially useful for outpatients and when the femoral approach is not possible. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Minimizing femoral artery access complications during percutaneous coronary intervention: A comprehensive review

Major bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) increase patient morbidity, prolong the hospital stay and costs, and are associated with reduced survival. Transfemoral access is still preferred at many centers given its familiarity and ease of use and is necessary in cases where large bore access is needed. Multimodality imaging with fluoroscopy, ultrasonography, and angiography can facilitate proper puncture of the common femoral artery. A proper technique (which includes femoral artery puncture and vascular access site closure) associated with adequate pharmacotherapy (both during PCI and peri‐procedural, for the treatment of the underlying coronary artery disease) has been shown to reduce the risk of bleeding and vascular complications associated with femoral artery access. Avoiding the use of arterial sheaths >6 French may further reduce the risk of bleeding. Data with vascular closure devices as a bleeding avoidance strategy are evolving but when used appropriately may further reduce the risk of bleeding and vascular access complications, and in this regard are synergistic with bivalirudin. Randomized trials to confirm these recommendations are needed. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Algorithms for challenging scenarios encountered in transradial intervention

Transradial intervention (TRI) was first introduced by Lucien Campeau in 1989 and since then has created a lasting impact in the field of interventional cardiology. Several studies have demonstrated that TRI is associated with fewer vascular site complications, offer earlier ambulation and greater post-procedural comfort. Patients presenting with ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) have experienced survival benefit and higher quality-of-life metrics as well with TRI. While both the updated scientific statement by the American Heart Association and the 2017 European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend a “radial first” approach there appears to be a lag in physicians adapting TRI as the preferred vascular access. We present a review focusing on identification and management of TRA related challenges and complications using a systematic algorithmic approach.     

Radial versus femoral approach for same‐day inter‐facility transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention

Background

The use of radial approach for coronary angiography, followed by same‐day inter‐facility transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not yet been evaluated.

Objectives

We sought to assess the safety and feasibility of using the transradial as compared to the transfemoral approach in patients undergoing diagnostic angiogram with same‐day transfer to a PCI facility.

Methods

Patients that underwent diagnostic coronary angiography between January 2011 and June 2017 in a referring facility, and were transferred for same‐day PCI were included. Patients’ demographics, as well as procedural data and in‐hospital outcome, were collected.

Results

Three hundred fifty‐two participants were included. Of these, 36 (10.2%) patients received transradial access. Patients in the transradial group were older (68 ± 10 vs 62 ± 12 years, P = 0.007), and received a significantly higher total dose of heparin including both, diagnostic and PCI procedures (5935 ± 1865 vs 10029 ± 2771 units, P < 0.001). None of the transradial patients experienced bleeding or access‐related complications. In the transfemoral group, 9 (3%) vascular‐access complications were recorded. Contrast volume was lower for transradial patients (177 ± 47 vs 216 ± 75 mL, P < 0.001). A higher proportion of outpatients were discharged from the PCI‐center the same day after transradial procedures (53% vs 1.3%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Transradial access for inter‐facility transfer for PCI after diagnostic angiogram appears safe and feasible, without increasing the risk for ischemic hand complications. Transradial access was associated with fewer bleeding and vascular access‐site complications, and with a higher likelihood for a same‐day discharge home in outpatients.     

Distal arteriovenous fistula formation after percutaneous coronary intervention: An old complication of a new access site

Dorsal or distal transradial artery access has recently gained popularity due to several perceived benefits that include favorable ergonomics, the potential for rapid hemostasis and lower rates of vascular complications. Still, no vascular access site is free of complications and reports of hematoma and pseudoaneurysm formation related to distal radial artery access have been reported in the literature. We present a case of a 71-year-old male who developed an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) involving the distal left radial artery following repeated access of the artery. This rare complication is likely avoidable with a comprehensive understanding of the surrounding anatomy and proper procedural technique, including the routine use of ultrasound for access.