Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention of left main disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
Recommended Citation
Ando T, Aoi S, Ashraf S, Villablanca PA, Telila T, Briasoulis A, Takagi H, Afonso L, Grines CL. Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention of left main disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv.
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
12-10-2018
Publication Title
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of transradial (TR) versus transfemoral (TF) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in left main (LM) lesion.
BACKGROUND: TR-PCI is the preferred approach compared with TF approach because of less bleeding risk. LM-PCI is often challenging because of the anatomical complexity and uniqueness of supplying a large myocardium territory. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of TR-PCI compared with TF-PCI of the LM lesions.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane database was conducted to identify studies that reported the comparable outcomes between both approaches. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method.
RESULTS: A total of eight studies were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. TR-PCI resulted in lower bleeding risk (OR 0.31, 95%CI 0.18-0.52, P < 0.01, I
CONCLUSIONS: TR-PCI may achieve similar efficacy with decreased bleeding risk compared to TF-PCI in LM lesions. When operator experience and anatomical complexity are favorable, TR approach is an attractive alternative access over TF approach in LM-PCI.
PubMed ID
30536799
ePublication
ePub ahead of print
