Radial Catheterization Advantages: Difference between revisions
(New page: {{SI}} {{CMG}} {{EH}} # Reduced bleeding # Early patient ambulation # Greater patient satisfaction # Absence of retroperitoneal hematomas, femoral pseudo aneurysms, arterial / venous fi...) |
Varun Kumar (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
{{EH}} | {{EH}} | ||
==Advantages of the Radial Approach to Cardiac Catheterization== | |||
# Reduced bleeding | # Reduced bleeding | ||
# Early patient ambulation | # Early patient ambulation | ||
Line 12: | Line 13: | ||
# Improved access in the obese patient | # Improved access in the obese patient | ||
In a meta-analysis of publications from 1980 to 2008, radial artery catheterization was associated with a 73% relative risk reduction in the risk of major bleeding (2.3% vs 0.05%, p<0.001) compared to femoral access. | In a meta-analysis of publications from 1980 to 2008, [[radial artery catheterization]] was associated with a 73% relative risk reduction in the risk of major bleeding (2.3% vs 0.05%, p<0.001) compared to femoral access. | ||
While the risk of the composite endpoint of death, [[myocardial infarction]] ([[MI]]) and [[stroke]] tended to be less frequent among patients undergoing radial artery catheterization (3.8% vs 2.5%, p = .058), there was no difference in mortality alone. Radial artery access also was associated with a 0.4% reduction in length of stay (p=0.001).<ref name="pmid19081409">{{cite journal |author=Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, Yusuf S, Mehta SR |title=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 |journal=[[American Heart Journal]] |volume=157 |issue=1 |pages=132–40 |year=2009 |month=January |pmid=19081409 |doi=10.1016/j.ahj.2008.08.023 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002-8703(08)00742-4 |issn= |accessdate=2010-02-23}}</ref> | While the risk of the composite endpoint of death, [[myocardial infarction]] ([[MI]]) and [[stroke]] tended to be less frequent among patients undergoing radial artery catheterization (3.8% vs 2.5%, p = .058), there was no difference in mortality alone. Radial artery access also was associated with a 0.4% reduction in length of stay (p=0.001).<ref name="pmid19081409">{{cite journal |author=Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, Yusuf S, Mehta SR |title=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 |journal=[[American Heart Journal]] |volume=157 |issue=1 |pages=132–40 |year=2009 |month=January |pmid=19081409 |doi=10.1016/j.ahj.2008.08.023 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002-8703(08)00742-4 |issn= |accessdate=2010-02-23}}</ref> | ||
==References== | |||
{{reflist}} | |||
[[Category:Cardiology]] | |||
{{WH}} | |||
{{WS}} |
Revision as of 13:20, 15 June 2011
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]
Please Take Over This Page and Apply to be Editor-In-Chief for this topic: There can be one or more than one Editor-In-Chief. You may also apply to be an Associate Editor-In-Chief of one of the subtopics below. Please mail us [2] to indicate your interest in serving either as an Editor-In-Chief of the entire topic or as an Associate Editor-In-Chief for a subtopic. Please be sure to attach your CV and or biographical sketch.
Advantages of the Radial Approach to Cardiac Catheterization
- Reduced bleeding
- Early patient ambulation
- Greater patient satisfaction
- Absence of retroperitoneal hematomas, femoral pseudo aneurysms, arterial / venous fistulas
- Reduced length of stay
- Improved access in the obese patient
In a meta-analysis of publications from 1980 to 2008, radial artery catheterization was associated with a 73% relative risk reduction in the risk of major bleeding (2.3% vs 0.05%, p<0.001) compared to femoral access. While the risk of the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke tended to be less frequent among patients undergoing radial artery catheterization (3.8% vs 2.5%, p = .058), there was no difference in mortality alone. Radial artery access also was associated with a 0.4% reduction in length of stay (p=0.001).[1]
References
- ↑ Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, Yusuf S, Mehta SR (2009). "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". American Heart Journal. 157 (1): 132–40. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2008.08.023. PMID 19081409. Retrieved 2010-02-23. Unknown parameter
|month=
ignored (help)