Transradial Approach for Coronary Interventions

  • Giovanni AmorosoEmail author


The transradial approach has been introduced as an alternative to the transfemoral approach to reduce bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary procedures. Over the past decade the transradial approach has been shown to reduce nurse workload, shorten hospital stay, and possibly reduce mortality in high-risk patients. Based on this experience the radial artery has become the preferred access site in a number of countries, and recently it has been endorsed as the preferred arterial access by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Following dedicated training, use of the transradial approach can be performed safely and efficiently in most patients; however, certain limitations apply, including anatomical abnormalities of the brachiocephalic vasculature and undue vasospasm. Radial artery occlusion represents the most common complication of this approach and, although mostly asymptomatic, it prevents reuse of the radial artery for future procedures, as well as its use as for a graft conduit or hemodialysis shunt. The risk of radial artery occlusion can be reduced by meticulous puncture technique, proper anticoagulation, nonocclusive hemostasis, and catheter downsizing. An arterial–introducer mismatch is responsible for patient discomfort, vessel trauma, and radial artery occlusion. By using smaller catheters or a «sheathless» approach, an arterial–introducer mismatch is avoided. Downsized («Slender») transradial coronary procedures have been shown to be safe and effective, and dedicated materials are now available.


  1. 1.
    Waksman R, King SB 3rd, Douglas JS, Shen Y, Ewing H, Mueller L, et al. Predictors of groin complications after balloon and new-device coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:886–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Radner S. Thoracal aortography by catheterization from the radial artery; preliminary report of a new technique. Acta Radiol. 1948;29:178–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campeau L. Percutaneous radial artery approach for coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1989;16:3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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(6):1269–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GG, de Benedictis ML, Rigattieri S, Turri M, Anselmi M, Vassanelli C, Zardini P, Louvard Y, Hamon M. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, Niemelä K, Xavier D, Widimsky P, Budaj A, Niemelä M, Valentin V, Lewis BS, Avezum A, Steg PG, Rao SV, Gao P, Afzal R, Joyner CD, Chrolavicius S, Mehta SR, RIVAL Trial Group. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Romagnoli E, Biondi-Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A, Politi L, Rigattieri S, Pendenza G, Summaria F, Patrizi R, Borghi A, Di Russo C, Moretti C, Agostoni P, Loschiavo P, Lioy E, Sheiban I, Sangiorgi G. Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2481–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bernat I, Horak D, Stasek J, Mates M, Pesek J, Ostadal P, Hrabos V, Dusek J, Koza J, Sembera Z, Brtko M, Aschermann O, Smid M, Polansky P, Al Mawiri A, Vojacek J, Bis J, Costerousse O, Bertrand OF, Rokyta R. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by radial or femoral approach in a multicenter randomized clinical trial: the STEMI-RADIAL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(10):964–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabró P, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, Zaro T, Rubartelli P, Briguori C, Andò G, Repetto A, Limbruno U, Cortese B, Sganzerla P, Lupi A, Galli M, Colangelo S, Ierna S, Ausiello A, Presbitero P, Sardella G, Varbella F, Esposito G, Santarelli A, Tresoldi S, Nazzaro M, Zingarelli A, de Cesare N, Rigattieri S, Tosi P, Palmieri C, Brugaletta S, Rao SV, Heg D, Rothenbühler M, Vranckx P, Jüni P, MATRIX Investigators. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9986):2465–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferrante G, Rao SV, Jüni P, Da Costa BR, Reimers B, Condorelli G, Anzuini A, Jolly SS, Bertrand OF, Krucoff MW, Windecker S, Valgimigli M. Radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions across the entire spectrum of patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(14):1419–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Steg PG, Huber K, Andreotti F, Arnesen H, Atar D, Badimon L, Bassand JP, De Caterina R, Eikelboom JA, Gulba D, Hamon M, Helft G, Fox KA, Kristensen SD, Rao SV, Verheugt FW, Widimsky P, Zeymer U, Collet JP. Bleeding in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary interventions: position paper by the Working Group on Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(15):1854–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kooiman J, Seth M, Dixon S, Wohns D, LaLonde T, Rao SV, Gurm HS. Risk of acute kidney injury after percutaneous coronary interventions using radial versus femoral vascular access: insights from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7(2):190–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hulme W, Sperrin M, Rushton H, Ludman PF, De Belder M, Curzen N, Kinnaird T, Kwok CS, Buchan I, Nolan J, Mamas MA. Is there a relationship of operator and center volume with access site-related outcomes? An analysis from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(5):e003333.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Uddin M, Bundhoo S, Mitra R, Ossei-Gerning N, Morris K, Anderson R, Kinnaird T. Femoral access PCI in a default radial center identifies high-risk patients with poor outcomes. J Interv Cardiol. 2015;28(5):485–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP, Mueller C, Valgimigli M, Andreotti F, Bax JJ, Borger MA, Brotons C, Chew DP, Gencer B, Hasenfuss G, Kjeldsen K, Lancellotti P, Landmesser U, Mehilli J, Mukherjee D, Storey RF, Windecker S, Baumgartner H, Gaemperli O, Achenbach S, Agewall S, Badimon L, Baigent C, Bueno H, Bugiardini R, Carerj S, Casselman F, Cuisset T, Erol Ç, Fitzsimons D, Halle M, Hamm C, Hildick-Smith D, Huber K, Iliodromitis E, James S, Lewis BS, Lip GY, Piepoli MF, Richter D, Rosemann T, Sechtem U, Steg PG, Vrints C, Luis Zamorano J, Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology. 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2016;37(3):267–315.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ratib K, Mamas MA, Anderson SG, Bhatia G, Routledge H, De Belder M, Ludman PF, Fraser D, Nolan J, British Cardiovascular Intervention Society and the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research. Access site practice and procedural outcomes in relation to clinical presentation in 439,947 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the United Kingdom. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(pt A):20–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Amoroso G, Sarti M, Bellucci R, Puma FL, D’Alessandro S, Limbruno U, Canova A, Petronio AS. Clinical and procedural predictors of nurse workload during and after invasive coronary procedures: the potential benefit of a systematic radial access. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2005;4(3):234–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Slagboom T, van der Wieken R. Outpatient coronary stent implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;29(2):323–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shroff A, Kupfer J, Gilchrist IC, Caputo R, Speiser B, Bertrand OF, Pancholy SB, Rao SV. Same-day discharge after percutaneous coronary intervention: current perspectives and strategies for implementation. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1(2):216–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cooper CJ, El-Shiekh RA, Cohen DJ, Blaesing L, Burket MW, Basu A, Moore JA. Effect of transradial access on quality of life and cost of cardiac catheterization: a randomized comparison. Am Heart J. 1999;138:430–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bertrand OF, Rao SV, Pancholy S, Jolly SS, Rodés-Cabau J, Larose E, Costerousse O, Hamon M, Mann T. Transradial approach for coronary angiography and interventions: results of the first international transradial practice survey. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(10):1022–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ball WT, Sharieff W, Jolly SS, Hong T, Kutryk MJ, Graham JJ, Fam NP, Chisholm RJ, Cheema AN. Characterization of operator learning curve for transradial coronary interventions. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4(4):336–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hamon M, Pristipino C, Di Mario C, Nolan J, Ludwig J, Tubaro M, Sabate M, Mauri-Ferré J, Huber K, Niemelä K, Haude M, Wijns W, Dudek D, Fajadet J, Kiemeneij F, European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, Working Group on Acute Cardiac Care of the European Society of Cardiology, Working Group on Thrombosis on the European Society of Cardiology. Consensus document on the radial approach in percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: position paper by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Working Groups on Acute Cardiac Care and Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology. EuroIntervention. 2013;8(11):1242–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vink MA, Amoroso G, Dirksen MT, van der Schaaf RJ, Patterson MS, Tijssen JG, Kiemeneij F, Slagboom T. Routine use of the transradial approach in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: procedural aspects and outcomes in 2209 patients treated in a single high-volume centre. Heart. 2011;97(23):1938–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Valgimigli M, Campo G, Penzo C, Tebaldi M, Biscaglia S, Ferrari R, RADAR Investigators. Transradial coronary catheterization and intervention across the whole spectrum of Allen test results. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(18):1833–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barbeau GR, Arsenault F, Dugas L, Simard S, Larivière MM. Evaluation of the ulnopalmar arterial arches with pulse oximetry and plethysmography: comparison with the Allen’s test in 1010 patients. Am Heart J. 2004;147:489–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pristipino C, Roncella A, Trani C, Nazzaro MS, Berni A, Di Sciascio G, Sciahbasi A, Musarò SD, Mazzarotto P, Gioffrè G, Speciale G, Prospective Registry of Vascular Access in Interventions in Lazio region (PREVAIL) Study Group. Identifying factors that predict the choice and success rate of radial artery catheterisation in contemporary real world cardiology practice: a sub-analysis of the PREVAIL study data. EuroIntervention. 2010;6:240–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Valsecchi O, Vassileva A, Musumeci G, Rossini R, Tespili M, Guagliumi G, Mihalcsik L, Gavazzi A, Ferrazzi P. Failure of transradial approach during coronary interventions: anatomic considerations. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;67(6):870–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lo TS, Nolan J, Fountzopoulos E, Behan M, Butler R, Hetherington SL, Vijayalakshmi K, Rajagopal R, Fraser D, Zaman A, Hildick-Smith D. Radial artery anomaly and its influence on transradial coronary procedural outcome. Heart. 2009;95(5):410–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Patel T, Shah S, Pancholy S, Rao S, Bertrand OF, Kwan T. Balloon-assisted tracking: a must-know technique to overcome difficult anatomy during transradial approach. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;83(2):211–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Patel T, Shah S, Pancholy S, Deora S, Prajapati K, Coppola J, Gilchrist IC. Working through challenges of subclavian, innominate, and aortic arch regions during transradial approach catheter. Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;84(2):224–35.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Amoroso G, Laarman GJ, Kiemeneij F. Overview of the transradial approach in percutaneous coronary intervention. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2007;8(4):230–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shah RM, Patel D, Abbate A, Cowley MJ, Jovin IS. Comparison of transradial coronary procedures via right radial versus left radial artery approach: a meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88(7):1027–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kiemeneij F, Vajifdar BU, Eccleshall SC, Laarman G, Slagboom T, van der Wieken R. Evaluation of a spasmolytic cocktail to prevent radial artery spasm during coronary procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003;58(3):281–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chen O, Goel S, Acholonu M, Kulbak G, Verma S, Travlos E, Casazza R, Borgen E, Malik B, Friedman M, Moskovits N, Frankel R, Shani J, Ayzenberg S. Comparison of standard catheters versus radial artery-specific catheter in patients who underwent coronary angiography through transradial access. Am J Cardiol. 2016;118(3):357–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shibata Y, Doi O, Goto T, Hase T, Kadota K, Fujii M, Zenke M, Fujii S, Ashida N, Sugioka J, Yamamoto H, Nishizaki M, Kameko M, Mitsudo K. New guiding catheter for transrad PTCA. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1998;43(3):344–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pancholy SB, Patel TM. Effect of duration of hemostatic compression on radial artery occlusion after transradial access. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;79(1):78–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hamon M, Lipiecki J, Carrié D, Burzotta F, Durel N, Coutance G, Boudou N, Colosimo C, Trani C, Dumonteil N, Morello R, Viader F, Claise B, Hamon M. Silent cerebral infarcts after cardiac catheterization: a randomized comparison of radial and femoral approaches. Am Heart J. 2012;164:449–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sirker A, Kwok CS, Kotronias R, Bagur R, Bertrand O, Butler R, Berry C, Nolan J, Oldroyd K, Mamas MA. Influence of access site choice for cardiac catheterization on risk of adverse neurological events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J. 2016;181:107–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Varenne O, Jégou A, Cohen R, Empana JP, Salengro E, Ohanessian A, Gaultier C, Allouch P, Walspurger S, Margot O, El Hallack A, Jouven X, Weber S, Spaulding C. Prevention of arterial spasm during percutaneous coronary interventions through radial artery: the SPASM study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;68:231–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rathore S, Stables RH, Pauriah M, Hakeem A, Mills JD, Palmer ND, Perry RA, Morris JL. Impact of length and hydrophilic coating of the introducer sheath on radial artery spasm during transradial coronary intervention: a randomized study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:475–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Choussat R, Black A, Bossi I, Fajadet J, Marco J. Vascular complications and clinical outcome after coronary angioplasty with platelet IIb/IIIa receptor blockade. Comparison of transradial vs. transfemoral arterial access. Eur Heart J. 2000;21:662–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bertrand OF, Larose E, Rodés-Cabau J, Gleeton O, Taillon I, Roy L, Poirier P, Costerousse O, Larochellière RD. Incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of bleeding after transradial coronary stenting and maximal antiplatelet therapy. Am Heart J. 2009;157(1):164–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Tizón-Marcos H, Barbeau GR. Incidence of compartment syndrome of the arm in a large series of transradial approach for coronary procedures. J Interv Cardiol. 2008;21:380–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rademakers LM, Laarman GJ. Critical hand ischaemia after transradial cardiac catheterisation: an uncommon complication of a common procedure. Neth Hear J. 2012;20:372–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Stella PR, Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, Slagboom T, van der Wieken R. Incidence and outcome of radial artery occlusion following transradial artery coronary angioplasty. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1997;40:156–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Costa F, van Leeuwen MA, Daemen J, Diletti R, Kauer F, van Geuns RJ, Ligthart J, Witberg K, Zijlstra F, Valgimigli M, Van Mieghem NM. The Rotterdam radial access research: ultrasound-based radial artery evaluation for diagnostic and therapeutic coronary procedures. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(2):e003129.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rashid M, Kwok CS, Pancholy S, Chugh S, Kedev SA, Bernat I, Ratib K, Large A, Fraser D, Nolan J, Mamas MA. Radial artery occlusion after transradial interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(1):e002686.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Spaulding C, Lefèvre T, Funck F, Thébault B, Chauveau M, Ben Hamda K, Chalet Y, Monségu H, Tsocanakis O, Py A, Guillard N, Weber S. Left radial approach for coronary angiography: results of a prospective study. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1996;39(4):365–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Uhlemann M, Möbius-Winkler S, Mende M, Eitel I, Fuernau G, Sandri M, Adams V, Thiele H, Linke A, Schuler G, Gielen S. The Leipzig prospective vascular ultrasound registry in radial artery catheterization: impact of sheath size on vascular complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:36–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sanmartin M, Gomez M, Rumoroso JR, Sadaba M, Martinez M, Baz JA, Iniguez A. Interruption of blood flow during compression and radial artery occlusion after transradial catheterization. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;70(2):185–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pancholy S, Coppola J, Patel T, Roke-Thomas M. Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion—Patent Hemostasis Evaluation Trial (PROPHET study): a randomized comparison of traditional versus patency documented hemostasis after transradial catheterization. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;72:335–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pancholy SB, Bernat I, Bertrand OF, Patel TM. Prevention of radial artery occlusion after transradial catheterization: the PROPHET-II randomized trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(19):1992–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rhyne D, Mann T. Hand ischemia resulting from a transradial intervention: successful management with radial artery angioplasty. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;76:383–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Babunashvili A, Dundua D. Recanalization and reuse of early occluded radial artery within 6 days after previous transradial diagnostic procedure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;77:530–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Zwaan EM, Koopman AG, Holtzer CA, Zijlstra F, Ritt MJ, Amoroso G, Moerman E, Kofflard MJ, IJsselmuiden AA. Revealing the impact of local access-site complications and upper extremity dysfunction post transradial percutaneous coronary procedures. Neth Hear J. 2015;23(11):514–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    van Leeuwen MA, van Mieghem NM, Lenzen MJ, Selles RW, Hoefkens MF, Zijlstra F, van Royen N. The effect of transradial coronary catheterization on upper limb function. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(4):515–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Zwaan EM, IJsselmuiden AJ, van Rosmalen J, van Geuns RM, Amoroso G, Moerman E, Ritt MJ, Schreuders TA, Kofflard MJ, Holtzer CA. Rationale and design of the ARCUS: effects of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention on upper extremity function. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88(7):1036–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kotowycz MA, Johnston KW, Ivanov J, Asif N, Almoghairi AM, Choudhury A, Nagy CD, Sibbald M, Chan W, Seidelin PH, Barolet AW, Overgaard CB, Džavík V. Predictors of radial artery size in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization: insights from the Good Radial Artery Size Prediction (GRASP) study. J Cardiol. 2014;30(2):211–6.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gwon HC, Doh JH, Choi JH, et al. A 5Fr catheter approach reduces patient discomfort during transradial coronary intervention compared with a 6Fr approach: a prospective randomized study. J Interv Cardiol. 2006;19:141–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Dahm JB, Vogelgesang D, Hummel A, Staudt A, Volzke H, Felix SB. A randomized trial of 5 vs. 6 French transradial percutaneous coronary interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002;57:172–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Grossman PM, Gurm HS, McNamara R, Lalonde T, Changezi H, Share D, Smith DE, Chetcuti SJ, Moscucci M, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2). Percutaneous coronary intervention complications and guide catheter size: bigger is not better. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(7):636–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Lefevre T, Morice MC, Bonan R, Dumas P, Louvard Y, Karrillon G, Loubeyre C, Piechaud JF. Coronary angiography using 4 or 6 French diagnostic catheters: a prospective, randomized study. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001;13(10):674–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Kaluski E, Moussa ID, Heuser RR, et al. Automated contrast injectors for angiography: devices, methodology, and safety. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74:459–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Chahoud G, Khoukaz S, El-Shafei A, et al. Randomized comparison of coronary angiography using 4F catheters: 4F manual versus “Acisted” power injection technique. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001;53:221–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ikari Y, Matsukage T, Yoshimachi F, Masutani M, Saito S. Transradial and slender percutaneous coronary intervention: less invasive strategy in PCI. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2010;25(2):60–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kiemeneij F, Yoshimachi F, Matsukage T, Amoroso G, Fraser D, Claessen BE, Saito S. Focus on maximal miniaturisation of transradial coronary access materials and techniques by the Slender Club Japan and Europe: an overview and classification. EuroIntervention. 2015;10(10):1178–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Yoshimachi F, Torii S, Naito T. A novel percutaneous coronary intervention technique for chronic total occlusion: contralateral angiography with a single guiding catheter. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87(6):E229–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Takeshita S, Saito S. Transradial coronary intervention using a novel 5-Fr sheathless guiding catheter. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74:862–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Takeshita S, Tanaka S, Saito S. Coronary intervention with 4-French catheters. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;75:735–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Amoroso G, van Dullemen A, Westgeest P, van Duinen M. “Virtual” 3 Fr transradial coronary stenting with the 5 Fr Meito Masamune sheathless guiding catheter: feasibility and safety in an outpatient setting. J Invasive Cardiol. 2016;28(3):109–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Yoshimachi F, Takagawa Y, Terai H, Takahashi A, Shimada Y, Katsuki T, Tohara S, Ueno H, Takada M, Shiode N, Yamada K, Kinoshita N, Honda T, Asano H, Takeshita S, Koiwa H, Shin T, Masutani M, Matsukage T, Saito S, Ikari Y, The V3 Registry Investigators. A prospective multicenter study using a virtual 3 Fr percutaneous coronary intervention system: the V3 Registry. J Invasive Cardiol. 2017;29(1):16–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Yoshimachi F, Kiemeneij F, Masutani M, Matsukage T, Takahashi A, Ikari Y. Safety and feasibility of the new 5 Fr Glidesheath Slender. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2016;31(1):38–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Aminian A, Dolatabadi D, Lefebvre P, Zimmerman R, Brunner P, Michalakis G, Lalmand J. Initial experience with the Glidesheath Slender for transradial coronary angiography and intervention: a feasibility study with prospective radial ultrasound follow-up. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;84(3):436–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Matsukage T, Masutani M, Yoshimachi F, Takahashi A, Katsuki T, Saito S, Terai H, Katahira Y, Uehara Y, Tohara S, Ohba Y, Shinohara S, Asano H, Matsumura T, Hata T, Ikari Y, PIKACHU Registry Investigators. A prospective multicenter registry of 0.010-inch guidewire and compatible system for chronic total occlusion: the PIKACHU registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;75:1006–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Verheye S, Khattab AA, Carrie D, Stella P, Slagboom T, Bartunek J, Onuma Y, Serruys PW. Direct implantation of rapamycin-eluting stents with bioresorbable drug carrier technology utilising the svelte coronary stent-on-a-wire: the DIRECT II study. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(5):e615–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.OLVG Amsterdam, Department of CardiologyAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations