Title of article :
Procedural Volume and Outcomes With Radial or Femoral Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention
Author/Authors :
Jolly، نويسنده , , Sanjit S. and Cairns، نويسنده , , John and Yusuf، نويسنده , , Salim and Niemela، نويسنده , , Kari and Steg، نويسنده , , Philippe Gabriel and Worthley، نويسنده , , Matthew and Ferrari، نويسنده , , Emile and Cantor، نويسنده , , Warren J. and Fung، نويسنده , , Anthony and Valettas، نويسنده , , Nicholas and Rokoss، نويسنده , , Michael and Olivecrona، نويسنده , , Goran K. and Widimsky، نويسنده , , Petr and Cheema، نويسنده , , Asim N. and Gao، نويسنده , , Peggy and Mehta، نويسنده , , Shamir R.، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2014
Pages :
10
From page :
954
To page :
963
Abstract :
Objectives udy sought to evaluate the relationship between procedural volume and outcomes with radial and femoral approach. ound (RadIal Vs. femorAL) was a randomized trial of radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography/intervention (N = 7,021), which overall did not show a difference in primary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or non–coronary artery bypass graft major bleeding. s -specified subgroup analyses, the hazard ratios for the primary outcome were compared among centers divided by tertiles and among individual operators. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the independent effect of center and operator volumes after adjusting for other variables. s h-volume radial centers, the primary outcome was reduced with radial versus femoral access (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.87) but not in intermediate- (HR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.72) or low-volume centers (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.31; interaction p = 0.021). High-volume centers enrolled a higher proportion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). After adjustment for STEMI, the benefit of radial access persisted at high-volume radial centers. There was no difference in the primary outcome between radial and femoral access by operator volume: high-volume operators (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.28), intermediate (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.27), and low (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.65; interaction p = 0.536). However, in a multivariable model, overall center volume and radial center volume were independently associated with the primary outcome but not femoral center volume (overall percutaneous coronary intervention volume HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.96; radial volume HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80 to 0.97; and femoral volume HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.07; p = 0.98). sions ural volume and expertise are important, particularly for radial percutaneous coronary intervention. (A Trial of Trans-radial Versus Trans-femoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] Access Site Approach in Patients With Unstable Angina or Myocardial Infarction Managed With an Invasive Strategy [RIVAL]; NCT01014273)
Keywords :
acute coronary syndrome(s) , femoral access , percutaneous coronary intervention , radial access , procedural volume
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Serial Year :
2014
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Record number :
1758151
Link To Document :
بازگشت