Comparison of transradial vs. transfemoral approach in the treatment of XXXX with primary angioplasty and abciximab.

@entity1 @entity548 @entity1427 @entity299 @entity432 @entity583
Compared to the femoral approach, the use of radial arterial access has been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of access site @entity548 complications in staged procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes comparing radial and femoral approaches in the treatment of @entity583 with primary angioplasty and the @entity1427 /IIIa inhibitor abciximab. Between 15 September 1999 and 15 September 2002, we prospectively enrolled 119 consecutive @entity1 undergoing primary angioplasty with abciximab comparing radial (n = 64) and femoral (n = 55) access. In this nonrandomized study, freedom from major @entity299 at 1-month follow-up occurred in 62 (97%) and 52 (94.5%) @entity1 in the radial and the femoral groups, respectively (P = 0.19). There were no major access site @entity548 complications in the radial group, as opposed to three (5.5%) in the femoral group (P = 0.03), all requiring transfusions, with surgical repair necessary in two. Uncomplicated clinical course occurred in 62 (97%) of @entity1 in the radial group and 49 (89%) in the femoral group (P = 0.04). Total hospital length of stay was significantly higher in the femoral group (5.9 +/- 2.1 vs. 4.5 +/- 1.2 days; P = 0.05). Cannulation time (from @entity1 arrival at the catheterization laboratory to the effective placement of @entity432 ) and procedural time were not significantly different in the radial and the femoral group (respectively 8.5 +/- 5.2 vs. 9.0 +/- 5.8 min, P = 0.81, and 42 +/- 28 vs. 44 +/- 27 min, P = 0.74). Nevertheless, time of radiation (23.1 +/- 11 vs. 16.5 +/- 10.9 min; P = 0.01) and dose-area product (28,616 +/- 16,571 vs. 18,819 +/- 10,739 R. cm2; P = 0.01) were significantly higher in the radial group. In @entity1 with @entity583 treated with primary angioplasty and abciximab, the transradial access is efficacious with fewer major access site complications than transfemoral access. Transradial approach produces a shorter length of stay, as compared to the transfemoral approach, although with longer times of radiation and higher dose-area product.
