Comparison of transradial and transfemoral access in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for complex coronary lesions.

OBJECTIVE: Comparison of transradial versus transfemoral access for complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with regard to both complications and long-term outcomes. BACKGROUND: Radial access has been shown to confer superior results in patients undergoing PCI, especially in patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, radial access has limitations of sheath and device size, which may increase procedure time and result in inferior outcomes. METHODS: Patients undergoing PCI for complex lesions, defined as type C according the ACC/AHA classification system, were included in this study. Propensity matching was performed to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics. Transradial patients were then compared to transfemoral patients in regard to procedural, in-hospital, and 6-month outcomes. RESULTS: Among 2142 patients with 2591 lesions treated, 1876 had femoral access and 267 had radial access. Radial access patients were more likely to be male (75% vs. 66%, P = 0.003) and less likely to present with acute myocardial infarction (27% vs. 42%, P < 0.001). Procedural characteristics demonstrated lower use of heparin in the femoral group (17% vs. 73%, P < 0.001) with similarly low use of glycoprotein inhibitors (5.6% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.14). Patients in the femoral group had higher rates of transfusions (3.7% vs. 0%, P = 0.004) and vascular complications (1.7% vs. 0%, P = 0.03). Following propensity matching, there was no difference in mid-term outcomes between radial and femoral groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with complex coronary lesions undergoing PCI, the radial approach demonstrates similar mid-term outcomes as the femoral approach with a potentially lower rate of complications. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Techniques to Optimize the Use of Optical Coherence Tomography: Insights from the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) Database.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a high-resolution intravascular imaging modality used to assess coronary arteries and as an adjunctive tool for optimization of percutaneous coronary interventions. Overall, the rate of complications and adverse events related to intravascular imaging is low. Limited data exist on the most commonly reported complications and modes of failure related to the use of OCT. Therefore, we analyzed the post-marketing surveillance data from the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database to assess the reported complications and failure modes for OCT and reviewed techniques to optimize device use. METHODS/MATERIALS: The MAUDE database was queried for all event reports involving coronary OCT devices. Two independent reviewers identified 49 device reports included in the final analysis. Modes of failure and device-related patient complications were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 49 cases with reported device-related issues, 6.1% involved malfunction prior to insertion of the OCT catheter, and 30.6% of reported events did not result in an associated patient-related adverse event. The most commonly reported adverse events included coronary dissection and difficulty removing the catheter within a previously stented segment. No events of contrast-induced nephropathy were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the MAUDE database highlight the modes of device-related events associated with OCT. Device issues are uncommon, and as a result, users should be aware of optimal techniques to prevent and minimize adverse events related to device use.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Orbital and Rotational Atherectomy in Calcified Narrowings in Patients Who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of rotational atherectomy (RA) and orbital atherectomy (OA) during percutaneous coronary intervention in an all-comer population with severely calcified lesions. We included all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with OA or RA in our institution from October 2013 until October 2016. Comparison of baseline and procedural characteristics, along with acute complication rates and postprocedural cardiac enzyme elevation, was performed. There were 191 RA and 57 OA patients. Other than creatinine clearance, which was lower in patients with OA (p = 0.01), there were no differences in baseline characteristics. OA was more frequent in left anterior descending artery lesions (p = 0.02), whereas RA was more common in right coronary artery lesions (p = 0.01). Intracoronary imaging rates were above 60% in both groups. There was a higher rate of coronary dissections with OA compared with RA (p = 0.003), but there was no difference in periprocedural events. Maximal troponin levels were similar in both groups. Residual stenosis measured by intravascular ultrasound in 29 patients revealed no significant differences between OA and RA (p = 0.58). In conclusion, RA and OA have similar safety and efficacy profiles in treating patients with calcified coronary lesions, and intracoronary imaging is highly beneficial in identifying coronary injury after atherectomy procedures.