Search

Coronary angiography is the gold standard for defining obstructive coronary disease. However, radiation exposure remains an unwanted hazard. Patients referred for coronary angiography with abdominal circumference<45 inches and glomerular filtration rate>60 ml/min were randomized to the fluorography (n=25) or cineangiography (n=25) group. Patients in the fluorography group underwent coronary angiography using retrospectively stored fluorography with repeat injection under cineangiography only when needed for better resolution per operator's discretion. Patients in the cineangiography group underwent coronary angiography using routine cineangiography. The primary end point was patient radiation exposure measured by radiochromic film. Secondary end points included the radiation output measurement of kerma-area product and air kerma at the interventional reference point (Ka,r) and operator radiation exposure measured by a dosimeter. Patient radiation exposure (158.2 mGy [76.5 to 210.2] vs 272.5 mGy [163.3 to 314.0], p=0.001), kerma-area product (1,323 μGy·m2 [826 to 1,765] vs 3,451 μGy·m2 [2,464 to 4,818], p<0.001), and Ka,r (175 mGy [112 to 252] vs 558 mGy [313 to 621], p<0.001) were significantly lower in the fluorography compared with cineangiography group (42%, 62%, and 69% relative reduction, respectively). Operator radiation exposure trended in the same direction, although statistically nonsignificant (fluorography 2.35 μGy [1.24 to 6.30] vs cineangiography 5.03 μGy [2.48 to 7.80], p=0.059). In conclusion, the use of fluorography in a select group of patients during coronary angiography, with repeat injection under cineangiography only when needed, was efficacious at reducing patient radiation exposure., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Transradial catheterization (TRC) has been associated with a lower incidence of major access site related complications as compared to the transfemoral approach. With the increased adoption of transradial access, it is essential to understand the potential major and minor complications of TRC. The most common complication is asymptomatic radial artery occlusion, which rarely leads to clinical events, owing to the dual collateral perfusion of the hand. Adequate anticoagulation, appropriate compression techniques, and smaller sheath size can minimize the risk of radial artery occlusion. Hand ischemia with necrosis has never been reported during TRC with thorough pre-examination of intact collateral circulation. Radial artery spasm is relatively common, and can result in access and procedural failure. It can be prevented by the use of vasodilator cocktails and hydrophilic sheaths. Radial artery perforation can lead to severe forearm hematoma and compartment syndrome if not managed promptly. Careful observation, prompt detection of the hematoma, and management with a pressure bandage dressing are critical to avoid serious complications. Pseudoaneurym and arteriovenous fistula are rare complications, which can likely be managed conservatively without surgical intervention. Nerve injury occurring during access has been reported. Close observation for improvement is necessary, although symptoms usually improve over time. In summary, to prevent access site complications, avoidance of multiple punctures, gentle catheter manipulation, use of guided compression, coupled with careful observation for adverse warning signs such as hematoma, loss of pulse, pain, are critical for safe and effective TRC., (Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Previous studies have shown that the right radial approach encounters more tortuosity than the left radial approach during transradial coronary angiography. The objective of this study was to compare the procedural difficulty of the right and left radial approaches in the modern era with dedicated transradial catheters. One hundred ninety-three patients scheduled for transradial coronary angiography with normal Allen test results and without histories of coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized to the right or left radial approach. The choice of catheter was left to the discretion of the operator, with the preferred catheter being a dedicated transradial Optitorque catheter. The primary end point was procedural difficulty, defined as (1) hydrophilic or coronary wire use for tortuosity, (2) stiff wire use for the coronary engagement, (3) multiple catheters used, or (4) nonselective injection. The clinical characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Procedural success was achieved in 98 of 101 (98%) in the right radial group and 91 of 92 (99%) in the left radial group. Procedural difficulty, fluoroscopy time, and contrast use were similar between the 2 groups. The use of a single catheter was more common in the right radial group (73% vs 18%, p <0.001). In conclusion, procedural success and difficulty were similar in the comparison groups. The right and left radial approaches are feasible and effective to perform coronary angiography and intervention., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)