Scholarlink

<p>Distal radial access (DRA) has emerged as an alternative approach to reduce the risk of radial artery occlusion in coronary angiography. Vascular access intervention therapy (VAIVT) is traditionally used to treat arteriovenous fistula stenosis. However, the feasibility and safety of DRA for VAIVT have not been established. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of using DRA for VAIVT. We included 421 consecutive VAIVT procedures for upper limb arteriovenous fistulas retrospectively. DRA for VAIVT was performed in 181 procedures (DRA group), and the remaining procedures were approached through the brachial artery or vein (SA group: standard access group). Clinical follow-up was performed to evaluate the incidence of hematoma and dialysis access-associated steal syndrome (DASS). The mean follow-up duration following VAIVT was 24.0&#xa0;months. The VAIVT success rate did not differ significantly between the groups (DRA: 97.8% vs. SA: 98.3%; <i>P</i> = 0.73), neither did the incidence of puncture site hematoma (DRA: 0.0% vs. SA: 0.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.51). There were no complications with DASS symptoms in the DRA group during the clinical follow-up. In the DRA group, 90 patients underwent a subsequent VAIVT procedure, and 85 patients (94.4%) underwent a subsequent VAIVT by DRA. DRA is a feasible and safe strategy for VAIVT and could be considered an option for VAIVT.</p> Graphical abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Feasibility and safety of the distal radial access for vascular access interventional therapy

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月4日

查看全文
  • Koji Kuroda,
  • Ayaka Murakami,
  • Takafumi Todoroki,
  • Masamichi Iwasaki,
  • Junichi Imanishi,
  • Souichiro Yamashita,
  • Wataru Fujimoto,
  • Makoto Takemoto,
  • Masanori Okuda

摘要

Distal radial access (DRA) has emerged as an alternative approach to reduce the risk of radial artery occlusion in coronary angiography. Vascular access intervention therapy (VAIVT) is traditionally used to treat arteriovenous fistula stenosis. However, the feasibility and safety of DRA for VAIVT have not been established. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of using DRA for VAIVT. We included 421 consecutive VAIVT procedures for upper limb arteriovenous fistulas retrospectively. DRA for VAIVT was performed in 181 procedures (DRA group), and the remaining procedures were approached through the brachial artery or vein (SA group: standard access group). Clinical follow-up was performed to evaluate the incidence of hematoma and dialysis access-associated steal syndrome (DASS). The mean follow-up duration following VAIVT was 24.0 months. The VAIVT success rate did not differ significantly between the groups (DRA: 97.8% vs. SA: 98.3%; P = 0.73), neither did the incidence of puncture site hematoma (DRA: 0.0% vs. SA: 0.8%; P = 0.51). There were no complications with DASS symptoms in the DRA group during the clinical follow-up. In the DRA group, 90 patients underwent a subsequent VAIVT procedure, and 85 patients (94.4%) underwent a subsequent VAIVT by DRA. DRA is a feasible and safe strategy for VAIVT and could be considered an option for VAIVT.

Graphical abstract