Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention is associated with lower patient radiation exposure in high-radial-volume centres: Insights from the RAY'ACT-1 study.

BACKGROUND: Literature suggests that radial access is associated with higher radiation doses than femoral access. AIMS: To compare patient radiation exposure during coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with radial versus femoral access. METHODS: RAY'ACT is a nationwide, multicentre, French survey evaluating patient radiation in interventional cardiology. Variables of patient exposure from 21,675 CAs and 17,109 PCIs performed at 44 centres during 2010 were analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Radial access was used in 71% of CAs and 69% of PCIs. Although median fluoroscopy times were longer for radial versus femoral access (CA, 3.8 vs 3.5minutes [P<0.001]; PCI, 10.4 vs 10.1minutes [P=0.001]), the Kerma-area product (KAP) was lower with radial access (CA, 26.8 vs 28.1Gy·cm2; PCI, 55.6 vs 59.4Gy·cm2; both P=0.001). Differences in KAP remained significant in the multivariable analysis (P<0.01), and in a propensity score-matched analysis (P=0.01). A significant interaction was found between KAP and the percentage of procedures with radial access by centre (P<0.001). KAP was higher by radial versus femoral access in low-radial-volume centres, and lower in high-radial-volume centres. Radiation protection techniques, such as the use of low frame rates (7.5 frame/s), were used more frequently in high-radial-volume radial centres. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicentre study, radial access was associated with lower radiation doses to patient than femoral access in high-radial-volume centres. Provided that radioprotection methods are implemented, radial access could be associated with lower patient radiation exposure.

Efficacy of pre-hospital use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction before mechanical reperfusion in a rapid-transfer network (from the Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry of Brittany).

Previous studies investigating prehospital use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction reached conflicting conclusions. The benefit of this strategy in addition to in-ambulance loading of dual-antiplatelet therapy remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze data from a prospective registry of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions admitted <24 hours after symptom onset (July 2006 to May 2012). A total of 2,052 patients managed in a physician-staffed mobile intensive care unit (MICU)<12 hours after symptom onset and scheduled for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) were retrospectively included. Patients who received GPIs in the MICU were compared with those who did not. The primary end point was infarct-related artery patency, defined as pre-PPCI Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3. GPIs were administered in the MICU to 737 patients (36%), including 430<2 hours after symptom onset, and 1,315 patients (64%) did not received prehospital GPIs. Pre-PPCI TIMI flow grade 3 rate was lower in patients treated in the MICU (17.2% vs 21.3%, p=0.03) because of patients treated >2 hours after symptom onset, of whom only 12.7% reached the primary end point. There was no significant difference between groups in the rate of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events. In conclusion, prehospital GPI use in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions<12 hours after symptom onset scheduled for PPCI neither improved pre-PPCI infarct-related artery patency nor reduced in-hospital major adverse cardiac events.