Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Coronary Intervention through the Brachial Artery Compared to the Radial Artery in Elderly Patients with Different Extubation Times
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.7329Keywords:
brachial artery puncture, radial artery puncture, coronary intervention, security, effectivenessAbstract
Introduction: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an important treatment for acute coronary syndrome. The main puncture paths of PCI include radial artery, brachial artery, and femoral artery. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of transbrachial intervention in elderly patients. Methods: According to intraoperative and postoperative nursing records, a retrospective analysis was performed for 70 elderly patients who underwent coronary intervention were divided into brachial artery A group (33 cases) and brachial artery B group (37 cases) according to immediate postoperative extubation compression dressing and 6 hours postoperative extubation compression dressing, and matched elderly patients who had successful transradial artery puncture in the same period as radial artery group (35 cases). The success rate of puncture and catheterization, arterial puncture time, total operation time, length of hospital stay, patient comfort score, incidence of arterial spasm and occlusion, subcutaneous ecchymosis and hematoma, epidermal blister occurrence, vagal reflex, pseudoaneurysm development, arteriovenous fistula formation, nerve damage risk assessment and osteofascial compartment syndrome were compared. Results: Compared with the radial artery group, the brachial artery group (group A and group B) had a higher success rate of puncture and catheterization (97.0% vs. 97.3% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.013), shorter arterial puncture time (2.45 ± 0.38 vs. 2.40 ± 0.35 vs. 3.40 ± 0.37, p = 0.000), and lower incidence of arterial spasm (0.0% vs. 0.0% vs. 34.3%, p = 0.000), arterial occlusion (0.0% vs. 0.0% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.005) and puncture site bleeding (12.1% vs. 5.6% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.001). The incidence of epidermal blister was higher in brachial artery A group than in brachial artery B group (24.2% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.003) or radial artery group (24.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.001), and the incidence of epidermal blister in brachial artery B group and radial artery group was not much different. There was no difference between the three groups in total operation time, length of hospital stay, comfort score, subcutaneous ecchymosis and hematoma, vagal reflex, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, nerve damage and osteofascial compartment syndrome. Conclusion: In elderly patients, coronary intervention through brachial artery is not inferior to radial artery.
References
Azzalini L, Karmpaliotis D, Santiago R, Mashayekhi K, Di Mario C, Rinfret S, et al. Contemporary issues in chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2022; 15: 1–21.
Chen SX, Zhang B, Hao YX, Xiao H. Percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy for acute superior mesenteric artery embolism via left distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox. Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. 2022; 12: 1641.
Li H, Chen X, Sha S, Xu X, Chen Y. Correlation of a guidewire maximum insertion length with tortuous radial artery and the success rate during transradial coronary angiography. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders. 2022; 22: 479.
Gargiulo G, Giacoppo D, Jolly SS, Cairns J, Le May M, Bernat I, et al. Effects on Mortality and Major Bleeding of Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access for Coronary Angiography or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data From 7 Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials. Circulation. 2022; 146: 1329–1343.
Lentz CM, Zogaj D, Wessel HK, Zeebregts CJ, Bokkers RPH, van der Laan MJ. Brachial and Axillary Artery Vascular Access for Endovascular Interventions. Annals of Vascular Surgery. 2022; 81: 292–299.
Cui T, Sun W, Wang F, Wang DJ, Xia YD, Gu XJ, et al. Clinical application of percutaneous brachial artery puncture and management of complications. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice. 2014; 18: 97–98. (In Chinese)
Alvarez-Tostado JA, Moise MA, Bena JF, Pavkov ML, Greenberg RK, Clair DG, et al. The brachial artery: a critical access for endovascular procedures. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2009; 49: 378–385; discussion 385.
Shinozaki N, Ikari Y. Distal radial artery approach for endovascular therapy. Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics. 2022; 37: 533–537.
Kennedy AM, Grocott M, Schwartz MS, Modarres H, Scott M, Schon F. Median nerve injury: an underrecognised complication of brachial artery cardiac catheterization. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 1997; 63: 542–546.
Roy S, Kabach M, Patel DB, Guzman LA, Jovin IS. Radial Artery Access Complications: Prevention, Diagnosis and Management. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine: Including Molecular Interventions. 2022; 40: 163–171.
Appelt K, Takes M, Zech CJ, Blackham KA, Schubert T. Complication rates of percutaneous brachial artery puncture: effect of live ultrasound guidance. CVIR Endovascular. 2021; 4: 74.
Koziarz A, Kennedy SA, El-Karim GA, Tan KT, Oreopoulos GD, Jaberi A, et al. The Use of Vascular Closure Devices for Brachial Artery Access: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 2023; 34: 677–684.e5.
Protty M, Gallagher S, Sharp AS, Anderson R, Ludman P, Curzen N, et al. Brachial arterial access for PCI: an analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society database. EuroIntervention. 2022; 17: 1100–1103.
Mele M, Mele A, Cuculo A, Tricarico L, Liantonio A, Imbrici P, et al. How brachial access compares to femoral access for invasive cardiac angiography when radial access is not feasible: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Vascular Access. 2022. (online ahead of print)
Gao C, Buszman P, Buszman P, Chichareon P, Modolo R, Garg S, et al. Influence of bleeding risk on outcomes of radial and femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention: an analysis from the GLOBAL LEADERS trial. Canadian Journal of Cardiology. 2021; 37: 122–130.
Capodanno D, Bhatt DL, Gibson CM, James S, Kimura T, Mehran R, et al. Bleeding avoidance strategies in percutaneous coronary intervention. Nature Reviews. Cardiology. 2022; 19: 117–132.
Hashimoto S, Banshodani M, Marubayashi S, Shintaku S, Moriishi M, Tsuchiya S, et al. Iatrogenic arteriovenous fistula in the brachial artery after percutaneous coronary intervention in a patient with end stage kidney disease. The Journal of Vascular Access. 2023; 11297298231158427. (online ahead of print)
Vidri R, Emerick T, Alter B, Brancolini S. Managing Vasovagal Reactions in the Outpatient Pain Clinic Setting: A Review for Pain Medicine Physicians Not Trained in Anesthesiology. Pain Medicine (Malden, Mass.). 2022; 23: 1189–1193.
