the past three decades, transradial access has emerged as the preferred technique for cardiac catheterization and interventions. The radial approach is safer than the femoral approach with reduction in major vascular and major bleeding complications and lower overall mortality. It improves patient comfort during the procedure, allows early mobilization in recovery and achieves better functional outcomes. Furthermore, set up time and procedure length are reduced with resultant laboratory cost savings [55]. With adequate preparation of the artery, increased operator experience, knowledge of complications and how to resolve them, access‐site crossover is rarely required. The future of transradial access is exciting and may evolve with refinements including distal radial access which is currently being evaluated in clinical trials.
Interactive multiple choice questions are available for this chapter on www.wiley.com/go/dangas/cardiology
References
1 1 Ferrante G, Rao SV, Jüni P et al. Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Interventions Across the Entire Spectrum of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 2016; 9:1419–1434.
2 2 Hamon M, Pristipino C, Di Mario C, et al. 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 Mar; 8(11):1242–51. doi: 10.4244/EIJV8I11A192.
3 3 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. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions 2018; 11:e000035.
4 4 Valgimigli M, Frigoli E, Leonardi S et al. Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1‐year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 2018; 392:835–848.
5 5 Neumann FJ, Sousa‐Uva M, Ahlsson A et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2019; 40:87–165.
6 6 Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. The Lancet 2011; 377:1409–1420.
7 7 Romagnoli E, Biondi‐Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A et al. 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.
8 8 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:e000035.
9 9 Lascarrou JB, Merdji H, Le Gouge A et al. Targeted Temperature Management for Cardiac Arrest with Nonshockable Rhythm. N Engl J Med 2019; 381:2327–2337.
10 10 Kotowycz MA, Dzavik V. Radial artery patency after transradial catheterization. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 5:127–33.
11 11 Sciahbasi A, Frigoli E, Sarandrea A et al. Radiation Exposure and Vascular Access in Acute Coronary Syndromes: The RAD‐Matrix Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69:2530–2537.
12 12 Dandekar VK, Vidovich MI, Shroff AR. Complications of transradial catheterization. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2012; 13:39–50.
13 13 Shroff AR, Gulati R, Drachman DE et al. SCAI expert consensus statement update on best practices for transradial angiography and intervention. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2020; 95:245–252.
14 14 Fernandez R, Zaky F, Ekmejian A, Curtis E, Lee A. Safety and efficacy of ulnar artery approach for percutaneous cardiac catheterization: Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2018; 91:1273–1280.
15 15 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; 88:1027–1033.
16 16 Kiemeneij F. Left distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography (ldTRA) and interventions (ldTRI). EuroIntervention 2017; 13:851–857.
17 17 Michael TT, Alomar M, Papayannis A et al. A randomized comparison of the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary artery bypass graft angiography and intervention: the RADIAL‐CABG Trial (RADIAL Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography and Intervention). JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013; 6:1138–44.
18 18 Tsigkas G, Makris A, Tsiafoutis I et al. The L‐RECORD Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2020; 13:1014–1016.
19 19 Vefali V, Saricam E. The comparison of traditional radial access and novel distal radial access for cardiac catheterization. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2019.
20 20 Liontou C, Kontopodis E, Oikonomidis N et al. Distal radial access: a review article. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2019.
21 21 Abdelaal E, Brousseau‐Provencher C, Montminy S et al. Risk score, causes, and clinical impact of failure of transradial approach for percutaneous coronary interventions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013; 6:1129–37.
22 22 Shroff AR, Gulati R, Drachman DE et al. SCAI expert consensus statement update on best practices for transradial angiography and intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2020; 95:245–252.
23 23 Nguyen P, Makris A, Hennessy A et al. Standard versus ultrasound‐guided radial and femoral access in coronary angiography and intervention (SURF): a randomised controlled trial. EuroIntervention 2019; 15:e522–e530.
24 24 Pancholy SB, Sanghvi KA, Patel TM. Radial artery access technique evaluation trial: randomized comparison of Seldinger versus modified Seldinger technique for arterial access for transradial catheterization. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 80:288–91.
25 25 Lo TS, Nolan J, Fountzopoulos E et al. Radial artery anomaly and its influence on transradial coronary procedural outcome. Heart 2008; 95:410–415.
26 26 Rodriguez‐Niedenfuhr M, Vazquez T, Nearn L, Ferreira B, Parkin I, Sanudo JR. Variations of the arterial pattern in the upper limb revisited: a morphological and statistical study, with a review of the literature. J Anat 2001; 199:547–66.
27 27 Louvard Y, Lefevre T. Loops and transradial approach in coronary diagnosis and intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000; 51:250–2.
28 28 Patel T, Shah S, Pancholy S et al. Working through complexities of radial and brachial vasculature during transradial approach. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2014; 83:1074–88.
29 29 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; 83:211–20.
30 30 Cha KS, Kim MH, Kim HJ. Prevalence and clinical predictors of severe tortuosity of right subclavian artery in patients undergoing transradial coronary angiography. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92:1220–2.
31 31 Abhaichand RK, Louvard Y, Gobeil JF, Loubeyre C, Lefevre
