Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What is the preferred hemostasis method for coronary angiography through the palmar artery access?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Trans-palmar catheterization has been considered to be safe and feasible and choosing a reliable hemostasis method is essential to confirm it. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and safety of three hemostasis approaches containing ulnar TR band, manual compression and wrist hyperextension in patients undergoing trans-palmar coronary angiography (CAG). In a non-randomized clinical trial, a total of 106 patients undergoing diagnostic CAG by tarns-palmar access were divided into three groups: ulnar TR band, manual compression and wrist hyperextension. Duration of primary hemostasis, patient satisfaction, puncture site pain severity, hospitalization time and local neuro-vascular complication were evaluated and compared in hospital and 30 days follow-up. The mean age of the patients was 62.9 ± 7.4 years and 72 patients (67.9%) were male. Primary hemostasis time was significantly shorter in hyperextension (11.5 ± 2.10 min) and manual compression groups (12.3 ± 2.20 min) than with TR band group (24.7 ± 10.25 min) (p value < 0.0001). Patient’s satisfaction was higher in hyperextension approach (9.4 ± 0.65) than manual compression (8.8 ± 0.79) and TR band group (8.2 ± 0.90) (p value < 0.0001). The most pain was seen in the TR band and the less in hyperextension group until 4 h after the procedure (p value < 0.0001). Hematoma, numbness and ulnar artery occlusion as well as hospitalization time did not have significant statistical differences (p value > 0.05). In conclusion, between three methods of hemostasis in trans-palmar catheterization, hyperextension approach is the preferred method because of effectiveness, safety and less time consuming hemostatic method compared others.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Roghani-Dehkordi F, Mansouri R, Khosravi A, Mahaki B, Akbarzadeh M, Kermani-Alghoraishi M. Transulnar versus transradial approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty: considering their complications. ARYA Atheroscler. 2018;14(3):128–31.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Mason PJ, Shah B, Tamis-Holland JE, et al. An update on radial artery access and best practices for transradial coronary angiography and intervention in acute coronary syndrome: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11(9):e000035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Liu P, Gao XL, Li BF, et al. Radial versus femoral artery access for percutaneous coronary angiography and intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in Chinese population. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(10):17151–66.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Campeau L. Percutaneous radial artery approach for coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 1989;16(1):3–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kedev S, Zafirovska B, Dharma S, Petkoska D. Safety and feasibility of transulnar catheterization when ipsilateral radial access is not available. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;83(1):E51–E60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Roghani-Dehkordi F, Hashemifard O, Sadeghi M, et al. Distal accesses in the hand (two novel techniques) for percutaneous coronary angiography and intervention. ARYA Atheroscler. 2018;14(2):95–100.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Liu J, Fu XH, Xue L, Wu WL, Gu XS, Li SQ. A comparative study of transulnar and transradial artery access for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome. J Interv Cardiol. 2014;27(5):525–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rao SV, Kedev S. Approaching the post-femoral era for coronary angiography and intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(4):524–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Roghani F, Shirani B, Hashemifard O. The effect of low dose versus standard dose of arterial heparin on vascular complications following transradial coronary angiography: randomized controlled clinical trial. ARYA Atheroscler. 2016;12(1):10–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Roghani-Dehkordi F, Hadizadeh M, Hadizadeh F. Percutaneous trans-ulnar artery approach for coronary angiography and angioplasty; a case series study. ARYA Atheroscler. 2015;11(5):305.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Petroglou D, Didagelos M, Chalikias G, et al. Manual versus mechanical compression of the radial artery after transradial coronary angiography: the MEMORY multicenter randomized trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11(11):1050–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Avdikos G, Karatasakis A, Tsoumeleas A, Lazaris E, Ziakas A, Koutouzis M. Radial artery occlusion after transradial coronary catheterization. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2017;7(3):305–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kanei Y, Kwan T, Nakra NC, et al. Transradial cardiac catheterization: a review of access site complications. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;78(6):840–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fernandez RS, Lee A. Effects of methods used to achieve hemostasis on radial artery occlusion following percutaneous coronary procedures: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2017;15(3):738–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rathore S, Stables RH, Pauriah M, et al. A randomized comparison of TR band and radistop hemostatic compression devices after transradial coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;76(5):660–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang Y, Tang J, Ni J, Chen X, Zhang R. A comparative study of TR Band and a new hemostatic compression device after transradial coronary catheterization. J Interv Med. 2018;1(4):221–8.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bertrand OF, De Larochellière R, Rodés- Cabau J, et al. A randomized study comparing same-day home discharge and abciximab bolus only to overnight hospitalization and abciximab bolus and infusion after transradial coronary stent implantation. Circulation. 2006;114:2636–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13:227–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Pancholy SB. Impact of two different hemostatic devices on radial artery outcomes after transradial catheterization. J Invasive Cardiol. 2009;21(3):101.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dai N, Xu DC, Hou L, Peng WH, Wei YD, Xu YW. A comparison of 2 devices for radial artery hemostasis after transradial coronary intervention. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015;30(3):192–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Valsecchi O, Vassileva A, Cereda AF. Distal ulnar approach in the palmar artery for coronary angiography and intervention: safety, feasibility, and reliability in 15 patients. JAVA. 2019;24(3):51–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cubero JM, Lombardo J, Pedrosa C, et al. Radial compression guided by mean artery pressure versus standard compression with a pneumatic device (RACOMAP). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;73(4):467–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sattur S, Singh M, Kaluski E. Transulnar access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol. 2014;26:404–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Camacho Freire SJ, Gómez Menchero AE, León Jiménez J, Roa Garrido J, Cardenal Piris R, Díaz Fernández JF. Radial/ulnar angioplasty in selected patients undergoing elective angiography or PCI using complex forearm approach. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med. 2017;18(7):501–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bi X, Wang Q, Liu D, Gan Q, Liu L. Is the complication rate of ulnar and radial approaches for coronary artery intervention the same? Angiology. 2017;68(10):919–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interventional Cardiology Research Center, Cardiovascular Research Institute, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, PO Box 815-838-8994, Isfahan, Iran

    Farshad Roghani-Dehkordi & Mohammad Kermani-Alghoraishi

  2. Cardiac Rehabilitation Research Center, Cardiovascular Research Institute, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

    Roya Kasiri

  3. Isfahan Endocrine and Metabolism Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

    Mojtaba Akbari

Authors
  1. Farshad Roghani-Dehkordi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roya Kasiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Kermani-Alghoraishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mojtaba Akbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Kermani-Alghoraishi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest relative to this work.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roghani-Dehkordi, F., Kasiri, R., Kermani-Alghoraishi, M. et al. What is the preferred hemostasis method for coronary angiography through the palmar artery access?. Cardiovasc Interv and Ther 36, 490–497 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-020-00707-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-020-00707-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation