Safety and Efficacy of Transbrachial Access for Endovascular Procedures: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.

Autor: Petrov I; Acibadem City Clinic Cardiovascular Center, Sofia, Bulgaria. Electronic address: ivo.petrov@acibademcityclinic.bg., Stankov Z; Acibadem City Clinic Cardiovascular Center, Sofia, Bulgaria., Tasheva I; Acibadem City Clinic Cardiovascular Center, Sofia, Bulgaria., Stanilov P; Acibadem City Clinic Cardiovascular Center, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions [Cardiovasc Revasc Med] 2020 Oct; Vol. 21 (10), pp. 1269-1273. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Feb 29.
DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.02.023
Abstrakt: Background: Endovascular procedures nowadays are generally performed via the femoral and radial artery. Although not routinely used by many, there is still an essential role for vascular interventions via brachial access. The technological advancement of endovascular devices leads to a significant increase of the variety of percutaneously treatable vascular pathology. The brachial artery approach nowadays is becoming crucial for complex procedures either as single access or in the context of mandatory double vascular approach for many complex interventions.
Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of brachial artery access for diagnostic arteriography and endovascular interventions in different vascular territories in a single-center setting on the basis of a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a large patient cohort.
Methods: Between 01/2013 and 09/2016, 11,274 endovascular procedures were performed in our hospital, 847 (7.5%) of them via brachial access, presenting the database for this study. All demographic, clinical, and periprocedural data were obtained prospectively and included in the computerized hospital records, and on this basis, a retrospective analysis was performed.
Results: While the radial access was the most used and constant for coronary and noncoronary interventions in our center (71%) in this period, the use of brachial access increased (from 4% to 12%) causing the femoral to decrease (from 27% to 16%). We used the brachial approach for diagnostic purposes in 162 patients (19%) and for head to toe endovascular interventions (including angioplasty, stenting, thrombolysis, or as adjunctive access) in 685 patients (81%). For 53 patients (6.2%), this was the only possible access for endovascular intervention. Overall access site-related complications occurred in 25 patients (2.9%), in 19 of them (2.2%) required surgical correction, for brachial artery thrombosis or pseudoaneurysm. The other six were managed conservatively. No permanent neurological deficits of the arm or severe bleeding were observed. Minor complications, mostly hematomas, occurred in 62 patients (7.3%), but they required no further treatment.
Conclusion: Brachial artery access expands our capability to perform complex procedures by allowing us to reach arterial targets in all territories. Complications of brachial vascular access are gradually decreasing together with the decrease of the crossing profile of the devices used in practice. However, when they occur, they often require surgical treatment. The growing experience of the team not only while obtaining the access but also while achieving adequate hemostasis ("patent hemostasis") is of great importance for minimizing the complications.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest We have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
(Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: