Early post-procedural patients compliance and VAS after UAE through transradial versus transfemoral approach: preliminary results
Tóm tắt
The aim of our study is to verify VAS and patient compliance in the immediate post-procedural time, in patients undergoing UAE through radial approach versus femoral procedure. Between January and September 2017, 30 consecutive patients (age range 28–47, average 32 years) were enrolled for the study. UAE was performed by two interventional radiologists with more than 10 years of experience and more than 100 cases of UAE done. Patients were divided into two groups: transfemoral approach (group a, n = 15 patients) and transradial approach (group b, n = 15 patients). After procedure, patients were questioned about the compliance using the questionnaire at 24 h and VAS rating at 6, 12, 18 and 24 h. The average of VAS in group b was lower than in group a in each evaluation at 6 h (p < 0.20), 12 h (p < 0.07), 18 h (p < 0.02) and 24 h (p < 0.22) on the basis of Mann–Whitney U test, however, without a clear scientific evidence. Also the compliance score at 24 h had better results in the group b (average 14.0, range 13.0–16.0) in comparison with group a (average 18.0, range 17.0–21.4) (p < 0.001). Transradial approach improves the compliance and VAS of patients undergone to UAE.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Michael TT, Alomar M, Papayannis A et al (2013) A randomized comparison of the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary artery bypass graft angiography and intervention: the RADIAL-CABG Trial (RADIAL Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography and Intervention). JACC Cardiovasc Interv 6(11):1138–1144
Cooper CJ, El-Sheiekn RA, Cohen DJ et al (1999) Effect of transradial access on quality of life and cost of cardiac catheterization; a randomized comparison. Am Heart J 138:430–436
Resnick NJ, Kim E, Patel RS, Lookstein RA, Nowkowski SF, Fischman MA (2014) Uterine artery embolization using a transradial approach: initial experience and technique. J Vasc Interv Radiol 25:443–447
Hibbert B, Simard S, Wilson KR et al (2012) Transradial versus transfemoral artery approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in the extremely obese. J Am Coll Cariol Interv 5:819–826
Barbeau GR, Arsenault F, Dugas L, Simard S, Larivière MM (2004) Evaluation of the ulnopalmar arterial arches with pulse oximetry and plethysmography: comparison with the Allen’s test in 1010 patients. Am Heart J 147(3):489–493
Filippiadis DK, Binkert C, Pellerin O, Hoffmann RT, Krajina A, Pereira PL (2017) Cirse quality assurance document and standards for classification of complications: the cirse classification system. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 40(8):1141–1146
Rao SV, Ou FS, Wang TY et al (2008) Trends in the prevalence and outcomes of radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv 1(4):379–386
Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, Yusuf S, Mehta SR (2009) 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 157(1):132–140
Iezzi R, Pompili M, Posa A et al (2017) Transradial versus transfemoral access for hepatic chemoembolization: intrapatient prospective single-center study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 28(9):1234–1239
Kumar AJ, Jones LE, Kollmeyer KR et al (2017) Radial artery access for peripheral endovascular procedures. J Vasc Surg 66(3):820–825
Posham R, Biederman DM, Patel RS et al (2016) Transradial approach for noncoronary interventions: a single-center review of safety and feasibility in the first 1,500 cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 27(2):159–166
Cartwright SL, Knudson MP (2008) Evaluation of acute abdominal pain in adults. Am Family Phys 77(7):971–978