TY - JOUR
T1 - Single center retrospective analysis of conventional and radial TIG catheters for transradial diagnostic coronary angiography
AU - Vorpahl, Marc
AU - Koehler, Till
AU - Foerst, Jason
AU - Panagiotopoulos, Spyridon
AU - Schleiting, Heinrich
AU - Koss, Klaus
AU - Ziegler, Gunda
AU - Brinkmann, Hilmar
AU - Seyfarth, Melchior
AU - Tiroch, Klaus
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Marc Vorpahl et al.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Current guidelines favor the radial approach for coronary angiography. Therefore, specialty radial diagnostic catheters were designed to engage both coronary arteries with a single device. However, it is unclear if single catheters are superior to conventional catheters. A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive right radial coronary angiographies to determine catheter use, fluoroscopy time, radiation dosage, and consumption of contrast. Procedures were performed with a single TIG catheter or conventional catheters (CONV). Procedures with coronary artery bypass grafts or ventricular angiographies were excluded. 273 transradial procedures were performed successfully. 95 procedures were performed with CONV and 178 procedures with a TIG. Crossover to additional catheters was higher in TIG (15.2%) compared to CONV (5.3%, p = 0.02). Fluoroscopy time was comparable between CONV and TIG, without crossover (2.2 ± 1.2 min versus 2.3 ± 1.2 min; n.s.), however, greater in the case of crossover for CONV (5.8 ± 0.7) and TIG (7.6 ± 3.0; p = 0.0001). Radiation dosage was similar in CONV and the TIG, without crossover (1419 ± 1075, cGy ∗ cm2 versus 1690 ± 1138; n.s.), however, greater for CONV (2374 ± 620) and TIG (3733 ± 2281, p = 0.05) with crossover. Overall, the amount of contrast was greater in TIG (56 ± 13 mL) versus CONV (48 ± 3 mL; p = 0.0003). CONV femoral catheters may be the primary choice for radial approach.
AB - Current guidelines favor the radial approach for coronary angiography. Therefore, specialty radial diagnostic catheters were designed to engage both coronary arteries with a single device. However, it is unclear if single catheters are superior to conventional catheters. A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive right radial coronary angiographies to determine catheter use, fluoroscopy time, radiation dosage, and consumption of contrast. Procedures were performed with a single TIG catheter or conventional catheters (CONV). Procedures with coronary artery bypass grafts or ventricular angiographies were excluded. 273 transradial procedures were performed successfully. 95 procedures were performed with CONV and 178 procedures with a TIG. Crossover to additional catheters was higher in TIG (15.2%) compared to CONV (5.3%, p = 0.02). Fluoroscopy time was comparable between CONV and TIG, without crossover (2.2 ± 1.2 min versus 2.3 ± 1.2 min; n.s.), however, greater in the case of crossover for CONV (5.8 ± 0.7) and TIG (7.6 ± 3.0; p = 0.0001). Radiation dosage was similar in CONV and the TIG, without crossover (1419 ± 1075, cGy ∗ cm2 versus 1690 ± 1138; n.s.), however, greater for CONV (2374 ± 620) and TIG (3733 ± 2281, p = 0.05) with crossover. Overall, the amount of contrast was greater in TIG (56 ± 13 mL) versus CONV (48 ± 3 mL; p = 0.0003). CONV femoral catheters may be the primary choice for radial approach.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942279663&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1155/2015/862156
DO - 10.1155/2015/862156
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84942279663
SN - 2090-8016
VL - 2015
JO - Cardiology Research and Practice
JF - Cardiology Research and Practice
M1 - 862156
ER -