A Comparison of Left and Right Radial Approach for Percutaneous Coronary Procedures
Information source: Capital Medical University
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on August 20, 2015 Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
Condition(s) targeted: Transradial Approach,; Coronary Angiography,; Percutaneous Coronary
Intervention: left radial approach (Procedure); Right radial approach (Procedure)
Phase: N/A
Status: Completed
Sponsored by: Capital Medical University Official(s) and/or principal investigator(s): Buxing Chen, Dr, Principal Investigator, Affiliation: Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University
Summary
Previous studies have shown that the transradial cardiac catheterization has decreased not
only bleeding complications related to the access site and procedural discomfort but also
morbidity and hospitalization as compared to transfemoral approach. At present, the right
radial approach (RRA) is the first choice routinely for coronary angiography and
interventions in daily clinical practice despite more marked subclavian artery tortuosity
than left radial approach (LRA). Although LRA has been thought to be more direct access to
the ascending aorta similar to transfemoral approach and may reduce fluoroscopy time and
cerebrovascular complications compared with RRA, the application of LRA for coronary
intervention is still low. Moreover, several studies have also obtained conflicting results
showing no difference in procedural success rate compared LRA and RRA using Judkins
catheters. To date, it remains unclear whether LRA is superior to RRA in term of safety and
feasibility for coronary angiography and interventions in real world practice and few data
of randomized control trial are available.
The aim of this study was to randomly investigate and compare the safety and feasibility of
LRA compared with RRA for coronary diagnostic angiography in Chinese subjects.
The investigators will enroll consecutively for 2 years all patients undergoing coronary
diagnostic procedures through trans radial approach.
The primary outcome was total procedural duration. Secondary outcomes included fluoroscopy
time, dose of radiation including cumulative air kerma and dose area product, contrast
volume and the incidence of vascular complications.
Clinical Details
Study design: Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Open Label, Primary Purpose: Treatment
Primary outcome: Total procedural duration
Secondary outcome: Fluoroscopy timeDose of radiation Contrast volume
Eligibility
Minimum age: 20 Years.
Maximum age: 85 Years.
Gender(s): Both.
Criteria:
Inclusion Criteria:
- All consecutive patients who undergo to diagnostic coronary procedures
Exclusion Criteria:
- Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction
- Previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery
- Hemodynamic instability
Locations and Contacts
Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China
Additional Information
Starting date: March 2011
Last updated: April 22, 2015
|