Incidence and predictors of radial artery occlusion following transradial coronary angiography: the proRadial trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the contemporary incidence and predictors of radial artery occlusion as well as the effectiveness of antithrombotic treatment for radial artery occlusion following transradial coronary angiography. BACKGROUND: The radial artery is the standard access for coronary angiography and even complex interventions. Postprocedural radial artery occlusion is still a common and significant complication. METHODS: This prospective study enrolled 2004 patients following transradial coronary angiography. After sheath removal, hemostasis was obtained in a standardized fashion. Radial artery patency was evaluated by duplex ultrasonography in all patients. In case of occlusion, oral anticoagulation was recommended and patients were scheduled for a 30-day follow-up including Doppler ultrasonography. RESULTS: A new-diagnosed radial occlusion was found in 4.6% of patients. The strongest independent predictors of radial occlusion were female sex and active smoking status. In the subgroup of patients with percutaneous coronary interventions, female sex followed by sheath size > 6 French were the strongest predictors of radial occlusion. 76 of 93 patients with radial occlusion received an oral anticoagulation for 30 days. However, reperfusion at 30 days was found in 32% of patients on oral anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: The incidence of radial artery occlusion following coronary angiography in contemporary practice appears with 4.6% to be lower as compared to previous cohorts. Female sex and smoking status are the strongest independent predictors of radial occlusion followed by procedural variables. The limited effectiveness of oral anticoagulation for treatment of radial artery occlusion suggests a primarily traumatic than thrombotic mechanism of this complication.

Acute type A aortic dissection extending beyond ascending aorta: Limited or extensive distal repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to delineate the effect of aortic arch surgery extension on the outcomes in acute type A dissection extending beyond the ascending aorta. METHODS: From 2001 to 2013, of 197 patients with type A dissection, 153 (78%) with dissection extending beyond the ascending aorta (age, 61 years; first quartile, 50; third quartile, 69; 67% men) were identified. Aortic repair involved isolated ascending replacement (n = 102), hemiarch (n = 37), and total arch replacement (n = 14). The median follow-up period was 4.9 years (first quartile, 2.5; third quartile, 7.6; 733 patient-years). RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 9.8%, 21.6%, and 28.6% (P = .122) for patients with no, hemiarch, and total arch replacement. Age > 80 years (odds ratio [OR], 9.37; P = .006), malperfusion syndrome (OR, 4.74; P = .004), and total arch replacement (OR, 6.47; P = .016) were independent predictors of perioperative mortality. Freedom from distal reintervention was 93% ± 3%, 97% ± 3%, and 100% at 1 year and 89% ± 3%, 97% ± 3%, and 100% at 5 years for the no, hemiarch, and total arch replacement groups, respectively (log-rank, P = .440). Marfan syndrome (OR, 12.40; P = .038) and dissection of all aortic segments (OR, 10.68; P = .007) predicted distal aortic reintervention. In-hospital mortality for elective reintervention was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Limiting the extent of surgery for type A aortic dissection to ascending aortic replacement was associated with low perioperative mortality. Thus, aortic arch repair can be deferred, because it can be performed electively with a lower mortality risk.