Cargando…
Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review
The main objective of this review paper is to study the comparison between transradial and transfemoral approach in catheterization. Transradial and transfemoral are two main approaches which are used as a diagnostic and therapeutic purpose in catheterization. The transradial approach in interventio...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5493462/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28690943 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1309 |
_version_ | 1783247510236561408 |
---|---|
author | Anjum, Ibrar Khan, Muhammad Adnan Aadil, Muhammad Faraz, Aniqa Farooqui, Mudassir Hashmi, Amerah |
author_facet | Anjum, Ibrar Khan, Muhammad Adnan Aadil, Muhammad Faraz, Aniqa Farooqui, Mudassir Hashmi, Amerah |
author_sort | Anjum, Ibrar |
collection | PubMed |
description | The main objective of this review paper is to study the comparison between transradial and transfemoral approach in catheterization. Transradial and transfemoral are two main approaches which are used as a diagnostic and therapeutic purpose in catheterization. The transradial approach in interventional cardiology is safe, effective, and feasible as compared to the transfemoral approach. The aim of this study is to compare pros and cons of transradial vs. transfemoral approach in catheterization. We conducted this systematic review on the role of transradial vs. transfemoral catheterization. The articles included real human data on interventional approaches. Reviews on these strategies were conducted in PubMed, medical literature analysis and retrieval system online (MEDLINE), Cochrane, Medscape and National Institute of Health. To maintain a high standard of review, studies published in all non-famous journals were excluded. Data collected from the studies have suggested that transradial approach has less bleeding complications, cost effective, decreased hospital mortality rate, and less access site complications as compared to transfemoral approach. However, longer procedural duration and radiation exposure are still concerns regarding transradial approach. The findings of the present study show that transradial approach in catheterization is safe, effective, and feasible as compared to the transfemoral approach. However, duration and radiation exposure are higher in the transradial access. Several studies suggest that the modern approach overweight in benefits with the comparison to the classical approach. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5493462 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Cureus |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54934622017-07-07 Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review Anjum, Ibrar Khan, Muhammad Adnan Aadil, Muhammad Faraz, Aniqa Farooqui, Mudassir Hashmi, Amerah Cureus Quality Improvement The main objective of this review paper is to study the comparison between transradial and transfemoral approach in catheterization. Transradial and transfemoral are two main approaches which are used as a diagnostic and therapeutic purpose in catheterization. The transradial approach in interventional cardiology is safe, effective, and feasible as compared to the transfemoral approach. The aim of this study is to compare pros and cons of transradial vs. transfemoral approach in catheterization. We conducted this systematic review on the role of transradial vs. transfemoral catheterization. The articles included real human data on interventional approaches. Reviews on these strategies were conducted in PubMed, medical literature analysis and retrieval system online (MEDLINE), Cochrane, Medscape and National Institute of Health. To maintain a high standard of review, studies published in all non-famous journals were excluded. Data collected from the studies have suggested that transradial approach has less bleeding complications, cost effective, decreased hospital mortality rate, and less access site complications as compared to transfemoral approach. However, longer procedural duration and radiation exposure are still concerns regarding transradial approach. The findings of the present study show that transradial approach in catheterization is safe, effective, and feasible as compared to the transfemoral approach. However, duration and radiation exposure are higher in the transradial access. Several studies suggest that the modern approach overweight in benefits with the comparison to the classical approach. Cureus 2017-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5493462/ /pubmed/28690943 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1309 Text en Copyright © 2017, Anjum et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Quality Improvement Anjum, Ibrar Khan, Muhammad Adnan Aadil, Muhammad Faraz, Aniqa Farooqui, Mudassir Hashmi, Amerah Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review |
title | Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review |
title_full | Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review |
title_fullStr | Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review |
title_short | Transradial vs. Transfemoral Approach in Cardiac Catheterization: A Literature Review |
title_sort | transradial vs. transfemoral approach in cardiac catheterization: a literature review |
topic | Quality Improvement |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5493462/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28690943 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1309 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT anjumibrar transradialvstransfemoralapproachincardiaccatheterizationaliteraturereview AT khanmuhammadadnan transradialvstransfemoralapproachincardiaccatheterizationaliteraturereview AT aadilmuhammad transradialvstransfemoralapproachincardiaccatheterizationaliteraturereview AT farazaniqa transradialvstransfemoralapproachincardiaccatheterizationaliteraturereview AT farooquimudassir transradialvstransfemoralapproachincardiaccatheterizationaliteraturereview AT hashmiamerah transradialvstransfemoralapproachincardiaccatheterizationaliteraturereview |