Dataset Information

Cardiovascular outcomes of transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in End-Stage renal Disease: A Regression-Based comparison.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Limited data is available on the comparison of outcomes of transradial (TR) and transfemoral (TF) access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with end-stage stage renal disease (ESRD).

Methods

Online databases were queried to compare cardiovascular outcomes among TR. and TF in ESRD patients. The outcomes assessed included differences in mortality, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI), bleeding, transfusion, and periprocedural cardiogenic shock (CS). Unadjusted odds ratios (OR) were calculated using a random-effect effect model.

Results

A total of 6 studies including 7,607 patients (TR-PCI = 1,288; TF-PCI = 6,319) were included. The overall mean age was 67.7 years, while the mean age for TR-PCI and TF-PCI was 69.7 years and 67.9 years, respectively. TR-PCI was associated with lower incidence of mortality (OR 0.46 95 % CI 0.30-0.70, p < 0.05, I2 0.00 %), bleeding (OR 0.45 95 % CI 0.29, 0.68, p < 0.05, I2 3.48 %), and transfusion requirement (OR 0.52 95 % CI 0.40, 0.67, p < 0.05, I2 0.00 %) (Fig. 1). There were no differences among TR-PCI and TF-PCI for periprocedural MI, periprocedural CS, and CVA outcomes.

Conclusion

TR access was associated with lower mortality, bleeding, and transfusion requirement as compared to TF access in patients with ESRD undergoing PCI.

SUBMITTER: Sattar Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9424587 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cardiovascular outcomes of transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in End-Stage renal Disease: A Regression-Based comparison.

Sattar Yasar Y Faisaluddin Mohammed M Almas Talal T Alhajri Noora N Shah Rajendra R Zghouzi Mohamed M Zafrullah Fnu F Sengodon Prasana M PM Zia Khan Muhammad M Ullah Waqas W Alam Mahboob M Balla Sudharshan S Lakkis Nasser N Kawsara Akram A Daggubati Ramesh R Chadi Alraies M M

International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature 20220823

<h4>Background</h4>Limited data is available on the comparison of outcomes of transradial (TR) and transfemoral (TF) access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with end-stage stage renal disease (ESRD).<h4>Methods</h4>Online databases were queried to compare cardiovascular outcomes among TR. and TF in ESRD patients. The outcomes assessed included differences in mortality, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI), bleeding, transfusion, and p ...[more]

PMID: 36051245

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the major cause of mortality worldwide. Coronary artery disease (CAD) contributes to half of mortalities caused by CVD. The mainstay of management of CAD is medical therapy and revascularisation. Revascularisation can be achieved via coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Peripheral arteries, such as the femoral or radial artery, provide the access to the coronary arteries to perform diagnostic or therapeutic (or both) procedures.ObjectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of the transradial compared to the transfemoral approach in people with CAD undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) or PCI (or both).Search methodsWe searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials on 10 October 2017: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in August 2017. There were no language restrictions. Reference lists were also checked and we contacted authors of included studies for further information.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials that compared transradial and transfemoral approaches in adults (18 years of age or older) undergoing diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) for CAD.Data collection and analysisWe used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. At least two authors independently screened trials, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for missing information. We used risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All analyses were checked by another author.Main resultsWe identified 31 studies (44 reports) including 27,071 participants and two ongoing studies. The risk of bias in the studies was low or unclear for several domains. Compared to the transfemoral approach, the transradial approach reduced short-term net adverse clinical events (NACE) (i.e. assessed during hospitalisation and up to 30 days of follow-up) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.94; 17,133 participants; 4 studies; moderate quality evidence), cardiac death (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88; 11,170 participants; 11 studies; moderate quality evidence). However, short-term myocardial infarction was similar between both groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 19,430 participants; 11 studies; high quality evidence). The transradial approach had a lower procedural success rate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.98; 25,920 participants; 28 studies; moderate quality evidence), but was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; 18,955 participants; 10 studies; high quality evidence), bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.74; 23,043 participants; 20 studies; low quality evidence), and access site complications (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.59; 16,112 participants; 24 studies; low quality evidence).Authors' conclusionsTransradial approach for diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) in CAD may reduce short-term NACE, cardiac death, all-cause mortality, bleeding, and access site complications. There is insufficient evidence regarding the long-term clinical outcomes (i.e. beyond 30 days of follow-up).

Project description:BackgroundTransfemoral approach (TFA) remains the most common vascular access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in many countries. However, in the last years several randomized trials compared transradial approach (TRA) with TFA in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but only few studies were powered to estimate rare events. The aim of the current study was to clarify whether TRA is superior to TFA approach in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A meta-analysis, meta-regression and trial sequential analysis of safety and efficacy of TRA in ACS setting was performed.Methods and resultsMedline, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, scientific session abstracts and relevant websites were searched. Data concerning the study design, patient characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes were extracted. The primary endpoint was death. Secondary endpoints were: major bleeding and vascular complications. Outcomes were assessed within 30 days. Eleven randomized trials involving 9,202 patients were included. Compared with TFA, TRA significantly reduced the risk of death (odds ratio [OR] 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.94; p = 0.016), but this finding was not confirmed in trial sequential analysis, indicating that sufficient evidence had not been yet reached. Furthermore, TRA compared with TFA reduced the risk of major bleeding (OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41-0.88; p = 0.008) and vascular complications (OR 0.35; 95% CI, 0.28-0.46; p<0.001); these findings were supported by trial sequential analyses.ConclusionsIn patients with ACS undergoing PCI, a lower risk of death was observed with TRA. Nevertheless, the association between mortality and TRA in ACS setting should be interpreted with caution because it is based on insufficient evidence. However, because of the clinical relevance associated with major bleeding and vascular complications reduction, TRA should be recommended as first-choice vascular access in patients with ACS undergoing cardiac catheterization.

Dataset Information

Cardiovascular outcomes of transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in End-Stage renal Disease: A Regression-Based comparison.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cardiovascular outcomes of transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in End-Stage renal Disease: A Regression-Based comparison.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets