Retrospective Comparison of Radial and Femoral Access in Coronary Interventions

Farhat Ullah Khan; Zeeshan Afzal; Syed Ahsan  Akhtar; Asfandyar Ayub; Muhammad Hafeez

doi:10.70749/ijbr.v3i4.1209

Authors

Farhat Ullah Khan Department of Cardiology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar.
Zeeshan Afzal Department of Cardiology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar.
Syed Ahsan Akhtar Department of Cardiology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar.
Asfandyar Ayub Department of Cardiology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar.
Muhammad Hafeez Department of Cardiology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i4.1209

Keywords:

Radial Access, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Femoral Access, Vascular Complications, Patient Recovery, Procedural Success

Abstract

Introduction: Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) remain a debatable choice of access site. Procedural success, complications, and recovery outcomes in terms of the impact of complications were shown to be lower for radial access when compared to femoral access. However, comparative outcomes in terms of procedural success require further evaluation. Objective: To compare the outcomes of radial and femoral access in PCI settings with respect to procedural success, complications, and patient recovery. Materials and Method: This retrospective cohort study conducted at Department of Cardiology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar from July, 2022 to December, 2022. Five hundred patients undergoing PCI were analyzed, and data were compared regarding procedural success, complications, and recovery outcomes between radial and femoral access. Results: Fewer complications, such as bleeding and hematoma, and shorter hospital stays were found with radial access. However, the groups had no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events. Conclusion: Femoral access is safer and more convenient for PCI, but it has more complications and slower recovery compared to radial access.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ng, A.K.Y., Ng, P.Y., Ip, A., Jim, M.H. and Siu, C.W., 2021. Association between radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention and long‐term mortality. Journal of the American Heart Association, 10(15), p.e021256.

Chiarito, M., Cao, D., Nicolas, J., Roumeliotis, A., Power, D., Chandiramani, R., Sartori, S., Camaj, A., Goel, R., Claessen, B.E. and Stefanini, G.G., 2021. Radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions: an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized trials. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 97(7), pp.1387-1396.

https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29486

Lee, O.H., Kim, Y., Son, N.H., Roh, J.W., Im, E., Cho, D.K. and Choi, D., 2021. Comparison of distal radial, proximal radial, and femoral access in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10(15), p.3438.

https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10153438

Alex, J. and Andrej, A., 2022. Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Radial and Femoral Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) in the Context of Novel Antithrombotic Regimens and Device Innovations: A 2022 Update. Journal of Rare Cardiovascular Diseases, 4(6), pp.127-132.

Reddy, B. and Kumar, V.V., 2025. Evaluating Radial vs. Femoral Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention at a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Prospective Observational Study. European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine, 15, pp.173-180.

Reifart, J., Göhring, S., Albrecht, A., Haerer, W., Levenson, B., Ringwald, G., Gärtner, P. and Reifart, N., 2022. Acceptance and safety of femoral versus radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): results from a large monitor-controlled German registry (QuIK). BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 22, pp.1-6.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-021-02283-0

Meijers, T.A., Aminian, A., van Wely, M., Teeuwen, K., Schmitz, T., Dirksen, M.T., Rathore, S., van der Schaaf, R.J., Knaapen, P., Dens, J. and Iglesias, J.F., 2021. Randomized comparison between radial and femoral large-bore access for complex percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiovascular Interventions, 14(12), pp.1293-1303.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.041

Gwefel, A., Louis, O. and Yassin, I., 2022. Comparison of the Renal Function Using Two Different Approaches for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Cardiol Vasc Res, 6(4), pp.1-8.

https://doi.org/10.33425/2639-8486.1148

AG Hassan, A.K., 2021. Comparison between femoral access versus radial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions. Journal of Medicine in Scientific Research, 4(3), p.15.

https://doi.org/10.4103/jmisr.jmisr_14_21

Cheema, A.A., Abbas, S., Shahid, M., Ahmed, M.S., Usmani, S. and Ali, S.M.N., 2024. The Impact of Radial Vs Femoral Access on Vascular Complications and Patients Outcomes in Complex PCI. Journal of Health and Rehabilitation Research, 4(2), pp.466-470.

https://doi.org/10.61919/jhrr.v4i2.876

Maximus, S., Kwong, M., Harding, J. and Mell, M., 2023. Radial arterial access is a safe alternative to brachial artery and femoral artery access for endovascular lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 77(3), pp.870-876.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2022.10.037

Chen, J., Li, W., Huang, L. and Zhou, L., 2023, October. Efficacy and Safety of Distal Radial Artery Approach for Coronary Angiography: A Retrospective Study. In The Heart Surgery Forum (Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. E577-E583).

https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.5887

Hernandez, D., Requena, M., Olivé-Gadea, M., De Dios, M., Gramegna, L.L., Muchada, M., García-Tornel, Á., Diana, F., Rizzo, F., Rivera, E. and Rubiera, M., 2024. Radial versus femoral access for mechanical thrombectomy in patients with stroke: a noninferiority randomized clinical trial. Stroke, 55(4), pp.840-848.

https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.124.046360

Stehli, J., Duffy, S.J., Koh, Y., Martin, C., Brennan, A., Dinh, D.T., Lefkovits, J. and Zaman, S., 2021. Sex differences in radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome are independent of body size. Heart, Lung and Circulation, 30(1), pp.108-114.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2020.06.023

15- Doll, J.A., Beaver, K., Naranjo, D., Waldo, S.W., Maynard, C., Helfrich, C.D. and Rao, S.V., 2022. Trends in arterial access site selection and bleeding outcomes following coronary procedures, 2011–2018. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 15(5), p.e008359.

https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.121.008359