Reviews
10 November 2015

Radial Versus Femoral Access in Invasively Managed Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Publication: Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 163, Number 12

Abstract

Background:

Studies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive management showed conflicting conclusions regarding the effect of access site on outcomes.

Purpose:

To summarize evidence from recent, high-quality trials that compared clinical outcomes occurring with radial versus femoral access in invasively managed adults with ACS.

Data Sources:

English-language publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases between January 1990 and August 2015.

Study Selection:

Randomized trials of radial versus femoral access in invasively managed patients with ACS.

Data Extraction:

Two investigators independently extracted the study data and rated the risk of bias.

Data Synthesis:

Of 17 identified randomized trials, 4 were high-quality multicenter trials that involved a total of 17 133 patients. Pooled data from the 4 trials showed that radial access reduced death (relative risk [RR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.90]; P  = 0.003), major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.86 [CI, 0.75 to 0.98]; P = 0.025), and major bleeding (RR, 0.57 [CI, 0.37 to 0.88]; P = 0.011). Radial procedures lasted slightly longer (standardized mean difference, 0.11 minutes) and had higher risk for access-site crossover (6.3% vs. 1.7%) than did femoral procedures.

Limitation:

Heterogeneity in outcomes definitions and potential treatment modifiers across studies, including operator experience in radial procedures and concurrent anticoagulant regimens.

Conclusion:

Compared with femoral access, radial access reduces mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and major bleeding in patients with ACS undergoing invasive management.

Primary Funding Source:

None. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015022031)

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

1.
Franchi FAngiolillo DJ. Novel antiplatelet agents in acute coronary syndrome. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2015;12:30-47. [PMID: 25286881]
2.
Stone GWWitzenbichler BGuagliumi GPeruga JZBrodie BRDudek Det alHORIZONS-AMI Trial Investigators. Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2218-30. [PMID: 18499566]
3.
Doyle BJRihal CSGastineau DAHolmes DR Jr. Bleeding, blood transfusion, and increased mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: implications for contemporary practice. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:2019-27. [PMID: 19477350]
4.
Ndrepepa GNeumann FJRichardt GSchulz STölg RStoyanov KMet al. Prognostic value of access and non-access sites bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:354-61. [PMID: 23881814]
5.
Singh M. Bleeding avoidance strategies during percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2225-38. [PMID: 25998668]
6.
Rao SVCohen MGKandzari DEBertrand OFGilchrist IC. The transradial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention: historical perspective, current concepts, and future directions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2187-95. [PMID: 20466199]
7.
Feldman DNSwaminathan RVKaltenbach LABaklanov DVKim LKWong SCet al. Adoption of radial access and comparison of outcomes to femoral access in percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated report from the national cardiovascular data registry (2007-2012). Circulation. 2013;127:2295-306. [PMID: 23753843]
8.
Jolly SSAmlani SHamon MYusuf SMehta SR. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am Heart J. 2009;157:132-40. [PMID: 19081409]
9.
Mann TCubeddu GBowen JSchneider JEArrowood MNewman WNet al. Stenting in acute coronary syndromes: a comparison of radial versus femoral access sites. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:572-6. [PMID: 9741495]
10.
Saito STanaka SHiroe YMiyashita YTakahashi STanaka Ket al. Comparative study on transradial approach vs. transfemoral approach in primary stent implantation for patients with acute myocardial infarction: results of the test for myocardial infarction by prospective unicenter randomization for access sites (TEMPURA) trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003;59:26-33. [PMID: 12720237]
11.
Cantor WJPuley GNatarajan MKDzavik VMadan MFry Aet al. Radial versus femoral access for emergent percutaneous coronary intervention with adjunct glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in acute myocardial infarction—the RADIAL-AMI pilot randomized trial. Am Heart J. 2005;150:543-9. [PMID: 16169338]
12.
Brasselet CTassan SNazeyrollas PHamon MMetz D. Randomised comparison of femoral versus radial approach for percutaneous coronary intervention using abciximab in acute myocardial infarction: results of the FARMI trial. Heart. 2007;93:1556-61. [PMID: 17639099]
13.
Li WMLi YZhao JYDuan YNSheng LYang BFet al. Safety and feasibility of emergent percutaneous coronary intervention with the transradial access in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Chin Med J (Engl). 2007;120:598-600. [PMID: 17442210]
14.
Chodór PKrupa HKurek TSokal ASwierad MWas Tet al. RADIal versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction (RADIAMI): A prospective, randomized, single-center clinical trial. Cardiol J. 2009;16:332-40. [PMID: 19653176]
15.
Chodór PKurek TKowalczuk ASwierad MWas THonisz Get al. Radial vs femoral approach with StarClose clip placement for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. RADIAMI II: a prospective, randomised, single centre trial. Kardiol Pol. 2011;69:763-71. [PMID: 21850615]
16.
Jolly SSYusuf SCairns JNiemelä KXavier DWidimsky Pet alRIVAL trial group. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409-20. [PMID: 21470671]
17.
Romagnoli EBiondi-Zoccai GSciahbasi APoliti LRigattieri SPendenza Get al. Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2481-9. [PMID: 22858390]
18.
Bernat IHorak DStasek JMates MPesek JOstadal Pet al. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by radial or femoral approach in a multicenter randomized clinical trial: the STEMI-RADIAL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:964-72. [PMID: 24211309]
19.
Valgimigli MGagnor ACalabró PFrigoli ELeonardi SZaro Tet alMATRIX Investigators. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2465-76. [PMID: 25791214]
20.
Joyal DBertrand OFRinfret SShimony AEisenberg MJ. Meta-analysis of ten trials on the effectiveness of the radial versus the femoral approach in primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2012;109:813-8. [PMID: 22196787]
21.
Karrowni WVyas AGiacomino BSchweizer MBlevins AGirotra Set al. Radial versus femoral access for primary percutaneous interventions in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:814-23. [PMID: 23968700]
22.
De Luca GSchaffer AWirianta JSuryapranata H. Comprehensive meta-analysis of radial vs femoral approach in primary angioplasty for STEMI. Int J Cardiol. 2013;168:2070-81. [PMID: 23490083]
23.
Dechartres ATrinquart LBoutron IRavaud P. Influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2013;346:f2304. [PMID: 23616031]
24.
Egger MJuni PBartlett CHolenstein FSterne J. How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:1-76. [PMID: 12583822]
25.
Moher DLiberati ATetzlaff JAltman DGPRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535. [PMID: 19622551]
26.
Higgins JGreen S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2008.
27.
DerSimonian RLaird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177-88. [PMID: 3802833]
28.
Biggerstaff BJTweedie RL. Incorporating variability in estimates of heterogeneity in the random effects model in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1997;16:753-68. [PMID: 9131763]
29.
Cornell JEMulrow CDLocalio RStack CBMeibohm ARGuallar Eet al. Random-effects meta-analysis of inconsistent effects: a time for change. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:267-70. [PMID: 24727843]
30.
Higgins JPThompson SGDeeks JJAltman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557-60. [PMID: 12958120]
31.
Vazquez-Rodriguez JMCalvino-Santos RABaz-Alonso JATrillo-Nouche RSalgado-Fernandez JSanmartin-Fernandez Met al. Radial vs. femoral arterial access in emergent coronary interventions for acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49 9 Suppl 2 12B.
32.
Yan ZXZhou YJZhao YXLiu YYShi DMGuo YHet al. Safety and feasibility of transradial approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. Chin Med J (Engl). 2008;121:782-6. [PMID: 18701040]
33.
Gan LLi QLiu RZhao YQiu JLiao Y. Effectiveness and feasibility of transradial approaches for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Nanjing Med Univ. 2009;23:270-4.
34.
Hou LWei YDLi WMXu YW. Comparative study on transradial versus transfemoral approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in Chinese patients with acute myocardial infarction. Saudi Med J. 2010;31:158-62. [PMID: 20174731]
35.
Wang YBFu XHWang XCGu XSZhao YJHao GZet al. Randomized comparison of radial versus femoral approach for patients with STEMI undergoing early PCI following intravenous thrombolysis. J Invasive Cardiol. 2012;24:412-6. [PMID: 22865313]
36.
Koltowski LFilipiak KJKochman JPietrasik ARdzanek AHuczek Zet al. Access for percutaneous coronary intervention in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: radial vs. femoral—a prospective, randomised clinical trial (OCEAN RACE). Kardiol Pol. 2014;72:604-11. [PMID: 24671918]
37.
Mehta SRJolly SSCairns JNiemela KRao SVCheema ANet alRIVAL Investigators. Effects of radial versus femoral artery access in patients with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2490-9. [PMID: 23103036]
38.
Jolly SSMehta SR. Coronary intervention: radial artery access comes of age. Lancet. 2015;385:2437-9. [PMID: 25791213]
39.
Eikelboom JWMehta SRAnand SSXie CFox KAYusuf S. Adverse impact of bleeding on prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Circulation. 2006;114:774-82. [PMID: 16908769]
40.
Mehran RPocock SNikolsky EDangas GDClayton TClaessen BEet al. Impact of bleeding on mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention results from a patient-level pooled analysis of the REPLACE-2 (randomized evaluation of PCI linking angiomax to reduced clinical events), ACUITY (acute catheterization and urgent intervention triage strategy), and HORIZONS-AMI (harmonizing outcomes with revascularization and stents in acute myocardial infarction) trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:654-64. [PMID: 21700252]
41.
Kwok CSKhan MARao SVKinnaird TSperrin MBuchan Iet al. Access and non-access site bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention and risk of subsequent mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events: systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8 4. [PMID: 25825007]
42.
Jolly SSCairns JYusuf SNiemela KSteg PGWorthley Met alRIVAL Investigators. Procedural volume and outcomes with radial or femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:954-63. [PMID: 24269362]
43.
Moussa IDKlein LWShah BMehran RMack MJBrilakis ESet al. Consideration of a new definition of clinically relevant myocardial infarction after coronary revascularization: an expert consensus document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1563-70. [PMID: 24135581]
44.
Mehran RRao SVBhatt DLGibson CMCaixeta AEikelboom Jet al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation. 2011;123:2736-47. [PMID: 21670242]
45.
Ratib KMamas MAAnderson SGBhatia GRoutledge HDe Belder Met alBritish Cardiovascular Intervention Society and the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research. Access site practice and procedural outcomes in relation to clinical presentation in 439,947 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the United kingdom. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:20-9. [PMID: 25616814]
46.
Hess CNPeterson EDNeely MLDai DHillegass WBKrucoff MWet al. The learning curve for transradial percutaneous coronary intervention among operators in the United States: a study from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation. 2014;129:2277-86. [PMID: 24756064]
47.
Lee MSWolfe MStone GW. Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes: re-evaluation of the current body of evidence. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:1149-52. [PMID: 24262614]  doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.08.003

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

cover image Annals of Internal Medicine
Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 163Number 1215 December 2015
Pages: 932 - 940

History

Published online: 10 November 2015
Published in issue: 15 December 2015

Keywords

Authors

Affiliations

Giuseppe Andò, MD, PhD
From the University of Messina, Messina, and Ferrarotto Hospital, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Davide Capodanno, MD, PhD
From the University of Messina, Messina, and Ferrarotto Hospital, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Grant Support: The authors are funded by their academic institutions.
Disclosures: Authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest. Forms can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M15-1277.
Editors' Disclosures: Christine Laine, MD, MPH, Editor in Chief, reports that she has no financial relationships or interests to disclose. Darren B. Taichman, MD, PhD, Executive Deputy Editor, reports that he has no financial relationships or interests to disclose. Cynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MSc, Senior Deputy Editor, reports that she has no relationships or interests to disclose. Deborah Cotton, MD, MPH, Deputy Editor, reports that she has no financial relationships or interest to disclose. Jaya K. Rao, MD, MHS, Deputy Editor, reports that she has stock holdings/options in Eli Lilly and Pfizer. Sankey V. Williams, MD, Deputy Editor, reports that he has no financial relationships or interests to disclose. Catharine B. Stack, PhD, MS, Deputy Editor for Statistics, reports that she has stock holdings in Pfizer.
Reproducible Research Statement: Study protocol, statistical code, and data set: Available from Dr. Andò ([email protected] or [email protected]).
Corresponding Author: Giuseppe Andò, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Section of Cardiology, University of Messina, c/o Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Policlinico “Gaetano Martino,” Via Consolare Valeria, 98124 Messina, Italy; e-mail, [email protected] or [email protected].
Current Author Addresses: Dr. Andò: Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Section of Cardiology, University of Messina, c/o Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Policlinico “Gaetano Martino,” Via Consolare Valeria, 98124 Messina, Italy.
Professor Capodanno: Department of General Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, c/o Ospedale Ferrarotto, Via Salvatore Citelli 31, 95124 Catania, Italy.
Author Contributions: Conception and design: G. Andò.
Analysis and interpretation of the data: G. Andò, D. Capodanno.
Drafting of the article: G. Andò, D. Capodanno.
Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: D. Capodanno.
Final approval of the article: G. Andò, D. Capodanno.
Statistical expertise: G. Andò.
Collection and assembly of data: G. Andò.
This article was published online first at www.annals.org on 10 November 2015.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format





Download article citation data for:
Giuseppe Andò, Davide Capodanno. Radial Versus Femoral Access in Invasively Managed Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med.2015;163:932-940. [Epub 10 November 2015]. doi:10.7326/M15-1277

View More

Get Access

Login Options:
Purchase

You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.

Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.

Create your Free Account

You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub

Related in ACP Journals

Full Text

View Full Text

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media