Scholarlink

Background <p>Transradial access is widely used for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, complications such as radial artery spasm, perforation, and occlusion remain clinically relevant. Jahanzeb’s Coronary Catheter Rolling Technique (JCRT) is a novel method designed to improve catheter navigation and reduce vascular trauma.</p> Objective <p>To evaluate the feasibility, safety and clinical outcomes of JCRT compared with the conventional radial catheterization technique.</p> Methods <p>In this prospective, non-randomized comparative study 4,697 patients undergoing elective coronary angiography or PCI via radial access were included. Patients were allocated to JCRT (<i>n</i> = 1,519) or the standard technique (<i>n</i> = 3,178). Primary endpoints were arterial perforation and radial artery occlusion. Secondary endpoints included major bleeding, radial artery spasm, thrombosis, and patient and physician satisfaction. Outcomes were analyzed using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and multivariable logistic regression was performed.</p> Results <p>JCRT was associated with a significantly lower overall complication rate (7.6% vs. 11.0%; OR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.52–0.92; <i>p</i> = 0.037). Significant reductions were observed in major bleeding (4.3% vs. 7.1%; OR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.42–0.81; <i>p</i> = 0.024), radial artery spasm (2.1% vs. 4.9%; OR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.27–0.63; <i>p</i> = 0.011), arterial perforation (1.6% vs. 3.8%; OR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.24–0.71; <i>p</i> = 0.032), and radial artery occlusion (2.8% vs. 6.3%; OR: 0.43, 95% CI 0.29–0.63; <i>p</i> = 0.006). On multivariable analysis, JCRT remained associated with reduced complications after adjustment (adjusted OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.51–0.93; <i>p</i> = 0.021). Patient and physician satisfaction scores were significantly higher with JCRT (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001).</p> Conclusion <p>JCRT is a feasible and safe technique associated with reduced vascular complications and improved satisfaction. Further multicenter randomized studies are warranted to confirm these findings.</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 coronary catheter rolling technique (Jahanzeb technique) for radial artery catheterization on arterial perforation and radial artery patency

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月18日

查看全文
  • Wahab Anwar,
  • Ali Karim,
  • Mubeena Javaid,
  • Poonam Kumari,
  • Daya Kumari,
  • F. N. U. Karishma,
  • Muhammad Salman,
  • Hesham Naeem,
  • Abida Perveen,
  • Jahanzeb Malik

摘要

Background

Transradial access is widely used for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, complications such as radial artery spasm, perforation, and occlusion remain clinically relevant. Jahanzeb’s Coronary Catheter Rolling Technique (JCRT) is a novel method designed to improve catheter navigation and reduce vascular trauma.

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility, safety and clinical outcomes of JCRT compared with the conventional radial catheterization technique.

Methods

In this prospective, non-randomized comparative study 4,697 patients undergoing elective coronary angiography or PCI via radial access were included. Patients were allocated to JCRT (n = 1,519) or the standard technique (n = 3,178). Primary endpoints were arterial perforation and radial artery occlusion. Secondary endpoints included major bleeding, radial artery spasm, thrombosis, and patient and physician satisfaction. Outcomes were analyzed using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and multivariable logistic regression was performed.

Results

JCRT was associated with a significantly lower overall complication rate (7.6% vs. 11.0%; OR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.52–0.92; p = 0.037). Significant reductions were observed in major bleeding (4.3% vs. 7.1%; OR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.42–0.81; p = 0.024), radial artery spasm (2.1% vs. 4.9%; OR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.27–0.63; p = 0.011), arterial perforation (1.6% vs. 3.8%; OR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.24–0.71; p = 0.032), and radial artery occlusion (2.8% vs. 6.3%; OR: 0.43, 95% CI 0.29–0.63; p = 0.006). On multivariable analysis, JCRT remained associated with reduced complications after adjustment (adjusted OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.51–0.93; p = 0.021). Patient and physician satisfaction scores were significantly higher with JCRT (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

JCRT is a feasible and safe technique associated with reduced vascular complications and improved satisfaction. Further multicenter randomized studies are warranted to confirm these findings.