Cargando…

Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices

A Glidesheath slender (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) and a sheathless Eaucath guiding catheter (Asahi Intecc, Nagoya, Japan) are two major slender devices utilized in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate the differences in access-site complications between these devices...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Isawa, Tsuyoshi, Horie, Kazunori, Honda, Taku, Taguri, Masataka, Tada, Norio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7443233/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32863791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/8216831
_version_ 1783573593082298368
author Isawa, Tsuyoshi
Horie, Kazunori
Honda, Taku
Taguri, Masataka
Tada, Norio
author_facet Isawa, Tsuyoshi
Horie, Kazunori
Honda, Taku
Taguri, Masataka
Tada, Norio
author_sort Isawa, Tsuyoshi
collection PubMed
description A Glidesheath slender (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) and a sheathless Eaucath guiding catheter (Asahi Intecc, Nagoya, Japan) are two major slender devices utilized in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate the differences in access-site complications between these devices in PCI for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). A total of 1108 consecutive patients who underwent transradial PCI for ACS were enrolled. Transradial PCI was performed using either a 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination (Glidesheath group) or a 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheter (Sheathless group); 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed, and 728 patients (364 in each group) were included in the propensity-matched population. In the matched patients, univariate analysis revealed that the Glidesheath group had less radial artery occlusion (RAO) at 30 days (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 4.1%, odds ratio (OR) = 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) =  0.12–0.91, p=0.039), whereas no significant between-group differences were observed in severe radial spasm (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 1.9%, OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.23–2.22, p=0.58) or access-site major bleeding (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 1.6%, OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.26–2.71, p=1.00). Multivariate analysis revealed that the choice for Glidesheath was significantly associated with less RAO (OR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.11–0.93, p=0.036). In conclusion, 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination is obviously more advantageous than 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheters for decreased risk of RAO. The potential low risk of RAO in our findings supports the adoption of the 7-Fr Glidesheath slender sheath/7-Fr guiding catheter combination in transradial PCI for ACS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7443233
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74432332020-08-27 Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices Isawa, Tsuyoshi Horie, Kazunori Honda, Taku Taguri, Masataka Tada, Norio J Interv Cardiol Research Article A Glidesheath slender (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) and a sheathless Eaucath guiding catheter (Asahi Intecc, Nagoya, Japan) are two major slender devices utilized in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate the differences in access-site complications between these devices in PCI for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). A total of 1108 consecutive patients who underwent transradial PCI for ACS were enrolled. Transradial PCI was performed using either a 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination (Glidesheath group) or a 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheter (Sheathless group); 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed, and 728 patients (364 in each group) were included in the propensity-matched population. In the matched patients, univariate analysis revealed that the Glidesheath group had less radial artery occlusion (RAO) at 30 days (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 4.1%, odds ratio (OR) = 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) =  0.12–0.91, p=0.039), whereas no significant between-group differences were observed in severe radial spasm (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 1.9%, OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.23–2.22, p=0.58) or access-site major bleeding (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 1.6%, OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.26–2.71, p=1.00). Multivariate analysis revealed that the choice for Glidesheath was significantly associated with less RAO (OR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.11–0.93, p=0.036). In conclusion, 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination is obviously more advantageous than 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheters for decreased risk of RAO. The potential low risk of RAO in our findings supports the adoption of the 7-Fr Glidesheath slender sheath/7-Fr guiding catheter combination in transradial PCI for ACS. Hindawi 2020-08-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7443233/ /pubmed/32863791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/8216831 Text en Copyright © 2020 Tsuyoshi Isawa et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Isawa, Tsuyoshi
Horie, Kazunori
Honda, Taku
Taguri, Masataka
Tada, Norio
Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices
title Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices
title_full Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices
title_fullStr Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices
title_full_unstemmed Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices
title_short Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices
title_sort slender sheath/guiding catheter combination vs. sheathless guiding catheter for acute coronary syndrome: a propensity-matched analysis of the two devices
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7443233/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32863791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/8216831
work_keys_str_mv AT isawatsuyoshi slendersheathguidingcathetercombinationvssheathlessguidingcatheterforacutecoronarysyndromeapropensitymatchedanalysisofthetwodevices
AT horiekazunori slendersheathguidingcathetercombinationvssheathlessguidingcatheterforacutecoronarysyndromeapropensitymatchedanalysisofthetwodevices
AT hondataku slendersheathguidingcathetercombinationvssheathlessguidingcatheterforacutecoronarysyndromeapropensitymatchedanalysisofthetwodevices
AT tagurimasataka slendersheathguidingcathetercombinationvssheathlessguidingcatheterforacutecoronarysyndromeapropensitymatchedanalysisofthetwodevices
AT tadanorio slendersheathguidingcathetercombinationvssheathlessguidingcatheterforacutecoronarysyndromeapropensitymatchedanalysisofthetwodevices