{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03682896379525593, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04431960049937578, 'mean_word_length': 4.807971014492754, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Practice patterns, feasibility and efficacy of coronary artery angiography using distal radial approach


 
 
 Most patients undergo coronary angiography by transradial approach. However, recently distal radial approach has been introduced as a novel approach for coronary angiography and intervention. There is uncertainty on the feasibility and safety of distal radial approach for coronary angiography.
 
 
 
 All consecutive 1450 coronary angiography cases (distal radial approach 237 cases, conventional transradial approach 1213 cases) between October 2018 and December 2019 were included in this study. Emergency coronary angiography cases and ad hoc coronary intervention cases were excluded. Patients were stratified into distal radial approach and conventional radial approach subgroups. Baseline characteristics, contrast amount, procedure time, radiation amount, fluoroscopy time, and complications in catheterization laboratory were statistically analyzed.
 
 
 
 There were no significant differences in age and gender between distal radial vs transradial groups: mean age, 70.8±10.5 vs 70.8±11.0 years; % of males, 77.2% vs 66.9%. Procedure time was significantly shorter in distal radial approach group (28.7±13.3 min vs 32.3±14.2 min, p<0.05) and total radiation amount during procedure was significantly less in distal radial approach group (366.4±189.5 ml vs 412.9±220.3 mGy, p<0.05).
 
 
 
 Coronary angiography with distal radial approach decreases the procedure time and total radiation amount. It is feasible and safe in most stable patients.
 
 
 
 Type of funding source: None
