Comparison between antegrade common femoral artery access and superficial femoral artery access in infrainguinal endovascular interventions.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antegrade access for infrainguinal endovascular intervention can be achieved through the common femoral artery (CFA) or superficial femoral artery (SFA). A few studies with small sample sizes have shown similar efficacy and safety for antegrade puncture of the CFA and SFA. In the present study, we analyzed the feasibility of SFA access and the occurrence of complications between SFA and CFA ipsilateral access in a broader cohort. METHODS: In the present retrospective study, we analyzed data from 462 patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) who had undergone peripheral angioplasty from 2009 to 2016. The inclusion criteria were PAD at Rutherford stage 3 to 6 and use of an endovascular approach. Patients with coagulation disorders, those receiving anticoagulant therapy, cases with deployment of closure devices, cases with more than one access on the same limb, and patients with inadequate bed rest after the procedure were excluded. A systematic analysis of all patients' electronic medical records was performed to evaluate the demographic aspects and technical success and identify the possible complications associated with CFA and SFA access. RESULTS: Of the 462 patients, 290 had undergone SFA puncture and 172, CFA puncture. The demographic evaluation of both groups revealed no differences between the two groups, except that more patients with diabetes were in the CFA group and more patients with dyslipidemia and an advanced clinical presentation were in the SFA group. First puncture access was successful in 99.7% of the SFA group and 96.5% of the CFA group (P = .01). The hematoma rate in the SFA and CFA groups was 20.3% and 11%, respectively (P = .01). The incidence of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was not significantly different between the two groups (P = .215). Only three patients had developed a pseudoaneurysm, two of whom were in the SFA group. Female sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.572; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.520-4.354; P < .001] and older age (OR, 1.034; 95% CI, 1.009-1.059; P = .007) were associated with an increased hematoma rate. CONCLUSIONS: SFA access was associated with a higher overall rate of hematoma compared with CFA access. However, no significant difference was found in the incidence of major bleeding between the two access sites. Planned SFA access should be considered as an alternative to CFA access.