Evaluation of repeat distal transradial access in the anatomic snuffbox.

PURPOSE: There is increasing interest in the distal radial artery in the anatomic snuffbox as an alternative arterial access point, but the durability of the distal radial artery to support repetitive accesses over multiple procedures is not well established. The purpose of this study was therefore to evaluate success rates for repeated left-sided distal transradial access (ldTRA) in the anatomic snuffbox. METHODS: In this single institution retrospective study, all patients undergoing radioembolization treatments from January 1st, 2019 to May 1st, 2020 were prospectively evaluated for ldTRA. ldTRA was performed by 15 different operators. Exclusion criteria were a left radiocephalic hemodialysis fistula, inability to properly position the arm, Barbeau D waveform, or failed prior ldTRA due to tortuosity. Barbeau patterns, arterial sizes, and success rates at the first, second, and third ldTRA were compared. RESULTS: Fifty patients were evaluated for ldTRA and 44, 39, and 10 underwent one, two, and three ldTRA attempts for a total of 93 procedures. There was no significant change in Barbeau patterns between the first and second (p = 0.13) or first and third (p = 1.0) ldTRA. There was no significant change in artery size between the first (mean, 2.3 mm; range, 1.5-3.4 mm) and second (mean, 2.3 mm; range, 1.6-3.3 mm) (p = 0.59) and first and third (mean, 2.4 mm; range, 1.9-3.3) (p = 0.45) ldTRA. The success rate was not significantly different between the first (93%, 41/44, 95% CI 81%-99%), second (95%, 37/39, 95% CI 83%-99%), and third (100%, 10/10, 95% CI 69%-100%) procedure (p = 1.0). The asymptomatic occlusion rate was 4.1% (2/49, 95% CI 0%-14%), and subsequent ldTRA was successfully completed in both patients with occlusions. There were no hemorrhagic or ischemic complications. CONCLUSION: Success rates are indistinguishable among first, second, and third time ldTRA suggesting that this is a durable access point.

Metoclopramide Reduces Fluoroscopy and Procedure Time during Gastrojejunostomy Tube Placement: A Placebo-Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a single 10-mg intravenous dose of the promotility agent metoclopramide reduces the fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and procedure time required for gastrojejunostomy (GJ) tube placement. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled consecutive patients who underwent primary GJ tube placement at a single institution from April 10, 2018, to October 3, 2019. Exclusion criteria included age less than 18 years, inability to obtain consent, metoclopramide allergy or contraindication, and altered pyloric anatomy. Average fluoroscopy times, radiation doses, and procedure times were compared using t-tests. The full study protocol can be found at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03331965). RESULTS: Of 110 participants randomized 1:1, 45 received metoclopramide and 51 received placebo and underwent GJ tube placement (38 females and 58 males; mean age, 55 ± 18 years). Demographics of the metoclopramide and placebo groups were similar. The fluoroscopy time required to advance a guide wire through the pylorus averaged 1.6 minutes (range, 0.3-10.1 minutes) in the metoclopramide group versus 4.1 minutes (range, 0.2-27.3 minutes) in the placebo group (P = .002). Total procedure fluoroscopy time averaged 5.8 minutes (range, 1.5-16.2 minutes) for the metoclopramide group versus 8.8 minutes (range, 2.8-29.7 minutes) for the placebo group (P = .002). Air kerma averaged 91 mGy (range, 13-354 mGy) for the metoclopramide group versus 130 mGy (range, 24-525 mGy) for the placebo group (P = .04). Total procedure time averaged 16.4 minutes (range, 8-51 minutes) for the metoclopramide group versus 19.9 minutes (range, 6-53 minutes) for the placebo group (P = .04). There were no drug-related adverse events and no significant differences in procedure-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of metoclopramide reduced fluoroscopy time by 34%, radiation dose by 30%, and procedure time by 17% during GJ tube placement.

Progression of Treated versus Untreated Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 4 Masses after Transcatheter Arterial Embolization Therapy.

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of treated vs untreated Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4 (LR-4) masses after transcatheter arterial embolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 167 patients undergoing embolization for HCC from January 2005 to December 2012, LR-4 masses were retrospectively identified on CT and MR imaging examinations performed before embolization. In 149 patients undergoing embolization from January 2013 to December 2016, masses prospectively classified as LR-4 were identified. In total, there were 81 LR-4 masses in 62 patients (16 women; mean age 62 y; range 29-83 y). Procedures were reviewed to determine whether LR-4 masses were within or outside the liver volume that received embolization during treatment of dominant masses. Time to progression to LR-5 and by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) was estimated for treated vs untreated LR-4 masses using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log rank test. RESULTS: LR-4 masses averaged 1.8 cm; 88%, 60%, 14%, and 14% demonstrated arterial phase hyperenhancement, washout, a capsule, and growth. Of LR-4 masses, 62 were within the liver volume that received embolization and considered treated, and 19 were outside and considered untreated. Response rates according to mRECIST were 37% vs 21% for treated vs untreated masses (P = .27). The 6- and 12-month rates of progression to LR-5 were 7% and 26% for treated masses vs 27% and 75% for untreated masses (P = .001). According to mRECIST, 7% and 27% of treated masses progressed vs 30% and 65% of untreated masses (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: LR-4 masses that receive embolization in the setting of dominant masses elsewhere show lower rates of progression compared with untreated masses.