Background: While concerns about the safety and procedural success of radial, as opposed to femoral, access for PCI have largely been abated, the association of radial access with patients’ health status recovery has not been explored. To address this gap in knowledge, we compared the symptoms, physical function and quality of life 1 year after PCI in patients treated with radial, as compared with femoral, access. Methods: This is a 10-center study of PCI, in whom 48 of 139 (35%) interventionalists used both radial and femoral approaches between 2009-2010. A total 2628 patients without prior CABG were interviewed and followed for one year. The previously validated Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) was used to assess disease-specific health status and the EQ-5D was used to quantify generic quality of life. Clinical characteristics and health status outcomes were compared between 296 radial and 2332 femoral PCI procedures. Results: Radial access was used in 11.2% of patients. No demographic (age, gender, race) or clinical factors (e.g. BMI, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, renal disease or prior cardiac history) were associated with radial use, except for an increased use among those with PAD (10.5% radial vs. 6.8% femoral, p=0.022) but reduced use among those with prior PCI (38.3% vs. 32.1%, p=0.037). There was no difference in health status outcomes based on SAQ angina frequency and quality of life, or the EQ-5D at baseline, 6 months or one year (table). Conclusion: In this multi-center observational registry, there was no association of radial access with long-term health status outcomes. These data suggest that there are no offsetting concerns about patients’ long-term health status benefits to counterbalance the peri-procedural safety benefits of a radial approach.
Adoption of Radial Access and Comparison of Outcomes to Femoral Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Background— Radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention (r-PCI) is associated with reduced vascular complications; however, previous reports have shown that <2% of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures in the United States are performed via the radial approach. Our aims were to evaluate temporal trends in r-PCI and compare procedural outcomes between r-PCI and transfemoral PCI. Methods and Results— We conducted a retrospective cohort study from the CathPCI registry (n=2 820 874 procedures from 1381 sites) between January 2007 and September 2012. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the adjusted association between r-PCI and bleeding, vascular complications, and procedural success, using transfemoral PCI as the reference. Outcomes in high-risk subgroups such as age ≥75 years, women, and patients with acute coronary syndrome were also examined. The proportion of r-PCI procedures increased from 1.2% in quarter 1 2007 to 16.1% in quarter 3 2012 and accounted for 6.3% of total procedures from 2007 to 2012 (n=178 643). After multivariable adjustment, r-PCI use in the studied cohort of patients was associated with lower risk of bleeding (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.49–0.54) and lower risk of vascular complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.50) in comparison with transfemoral PCI. The reduction in bleeding and vascular complications was consistent across important subgroups of age, sex, and clinical presentation. Conclusions— There has been increasing adoption of r-PCI in the United States. Transradial PCI now accounts for 1 of 6 PCIs performed in contemporary clinical practice. In comparison with traditional femoral access, transradial PCI is associated with lower vascular and bleeding complication rates.