We previously reported safety and usefulness of transradial iliac artery stenting using 6 Fr guiding sheath. However, radial artery occlusion was a major limitation of this procedure. We analyzed the safety and utility of slender transradial iliac artery stenting using a 4.5 Fr guiding sheath to prevent radial artery occlusion. We performed transradial iliac artery stenting in left radial artery, using a 4.5 Fr sheath incorporating a shaft length of 110 cm, for 34 lesions in 29 patients. Transradial intervention was attempted at the discretion of the operator. Clinical data were analyzed retrospectively. Cases with scheduled multiple sheath insertions for a bidirectional approach were excluded. Twenty-three (79.3%) patients were male. Diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and smoking habit were present in 11 (37.9%), 27 (93.1%), 19 (65.5%), and 24 (82.8%) patients, respectively. Nine lesions (26.5%) were diagnosed as chronic total occlusion. All lesions were successfully treated using a total of 40 stents incorporating a 4.5 Fr radial access system. Ankle-brachial index (ABI) significantly improved from 0.68 ± 0.15 to 0.99 ± 0.17 (p < 0.0001) after the procedure. No patients had procedural or access site-related complications such as hematoma, major bleeding, blood transfusion, stroke, cholesterol embolism, aortic dissection, or arterial perforation. Radial artery occlusion was absent in all cases. ABI value was well maintained at 0.98 ± 0.13 at 1 year, and no target lesion revascularizations were reported. Slender transradial iliac artery stenting using a 4.5 Fr guiding sheath is safe, feasible, and less invasive, and shows no incidence of radial artery occlusion, in carefully selected patient populations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors have no conflict of interests.
The authors complied with human studies guidelines of Tokai University, and obtained informed consents from the patients.
Soga Y, Iida O, Kawasaki D, Yamauchi Y, Suzuki K, Hirano K, et al. Contemporary outcomes after endovascular treatment for aorto-iliac artery disease. Circ J. 2012;76:2697–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shinozaki N, Ogata N, Ikari Y. Initial results of transradial iliac artery stenting. Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014;48:51–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy AK, Garot P, Louvard Y, Neylon A, Spaziano M, Sawaya FJ, et al. Comparison of transradial vs transfemoral access for aortoiliac and femoropopliteal interventions: a single-center experience. J Endovasc Ther. 2016;23:880–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coscas R, de Blic R, Capdevila C, Javerliat I, Goeau-Brissonniere O, Coggia M. Percutaneous radial access for peripheral transluminal angioplasty. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:463–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cortese B, Trani C, Lorenzoni R, Sbarzaglia P, Latib A, Tommasino A, et al. Safety and feasibility of iliac endovascular interventions with a radial approach. Results from a multicenter study coordinated by the Italian Radial Force. Int J Cardiol. 2014;175:280–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenzoni R, Lisi C, Corciu A, Lazzari M, Bovenzi F. Tailored use of transradial access for above-the-knee angioplasty. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21:635–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yatskar L, Selzer F, Feit F, Cohen HA, Jacobs AK, Williams DO, et al. Access site hematoma requiring blood transfusion predicts mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: data from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;69:961–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox N, Resnic FS, Popma JJ, Simon DI, Eisenhauer AC, Rogers C. Comparison of the risk of vascular complications associated with femoral and radial access coronary catheterization procedures in obese versus nonobese patients. Am J Cardiol. 2004;94:1174–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamon M, Coutance G. Transradial intervention for minimizing bleeding complications in percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104:55C–9C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GG, de Benedictis ML, Rigattieri S, Turri M, Anselmi M, et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:349–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, Slagboom T, van der Wieken R. A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: the access study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;29:1269–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brueck M, Bandorski D, Kramer W, Wieczorek M, Holtgen R, Tillmanns H. A randomized comparison of transradial versus transfemoral approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:1047–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabro P, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, Zaro T, et al. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2465–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shinozaki N, Minowa T, Ikari Y. Transradial intervention for chronic total occlusion at the external iliac artery using a bidirectional approach through a single guiding catheter. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2017;32:174–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito S, Ikei H, Hosokawa G, Tanaka S. Influence of the ratio between radial artery inner diameter and sheath outer diameter on radial artery flow after transradial coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 1999;46:173–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar