Lower complication rates associated with transradial versus transfemoral flow diverting stent placement.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no large-scale studies in the neurointerventional literature comparing safety between transradial (TRA) and transfemoral (TFA) approaches for flow diversion procedures. This study aims to assess complication rates in a large multicenter registry for TRA versus TFA flow diversion. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed flow diversion cases for cerebral aneurysms from 14 institutions from 2010 to 2019. Pooled analysis of proportions was calculated using weighted analysis with 95% CI to account for results from multiple centers. Access site complication rate and overall complication rate were compared between the two approaches. RESULTS: A total of 2,285 patients who underwent flow diversion were analyzed, with 134 (5.86%) treated with TRA and 2151 (94.14%) via TFA. The two groups shared similar patient and aneurysm characteristics. Crossover from TRA to TFA was documented in 12 (8.63%) patients. There were no access site complications in the TRA group. There was a significantly higher access site complication rate in the TFA cohort as compared with TRA (2.48%, 95% CI 2.40% to 2.57%, vs 0%; p=0.039). One death resulted from a femoral access site complication. The overall complications rate was also higher in the TFA group (9.02%, 95% CI 8.15% to 9.89%) compared with the TRA group (3.73%, 95% CI 3.13% to 4.28%; p=0.035). CONCLUSION: TRA may be a safer approach for flow diversion to treat cerebral aneurysms at a wide range of locations. Both access site complication rate and overall complication rate were lower for TRA flow diversion compared with TFA in this large series.

Fast-track incorporation of the transradial approach in endovascular neurointervention.

BACKGROUND: The transradial approach as a frontline approach is a novel technique in neuroendovascular procedures. In this study we aim to present our early experience with full transition to transradial access as the first-line approach for neuroendovascular procedures. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on the first 100 consecutive patients who underwent a diagnostic or interventional neuroendovascular procedure using the transradial approach at our institution between March 22 and April 30, 2019. Baseline characteristics were collected in addition to the type of procedure, access site, catheters and wires used, complications, and whether there was crossover to transfemoral access. RESULTS: Transradial access was attempted in 121 cases and 91 cases were completed successfully (72 diagnostic procedures and 19 interventional procedures). Mean (SD) age was 56.8 (14.7) years, 54.9% (50/91) underwent the procedure in the outpatient setting, and 60.4% (55/91) were women. Seven patients had minor immediate complications related to the radial access. Interventional procedures successfully performed included aneurysm embolization (ruptured (n=3) and unruptured (n=8)), tumor embolization (n=2), cervical internal carotid artery stenting (n=2), balloon occlusion test (n=1), vertebral artery sacrifice (n=1), and arteriovenous malformation embolization (n=2). CONCLUSION: In this early experience, full transition to the transradial approach as the frontline approach is feasible with a low complication rate for both diagnostic and interventional neuroendovascular procedures.