Publication:
Procedural success with radial access for carotid artery stenting: Systematic review and meta-analysis

dc.contributor.authorTanaporn Jaroenngarmsameren_US
dc.contributor.authorKartik Dev Bhatiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorHans Kortmanen_US
dc.contributor.authorEmanuele Orruen_US
dc.contributor.authorTimo Kringsen_US
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherToronto Western Hospital University of Torontoen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-27T03:37:00Z
dc.date.available2020-01-27T03:37:00Z
dc.date.issued2020-01-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Background Femoral access is the traditional approach for endovascular carotid artery stenting. Radial access is increasingly used as an alternative approach due to its known anatomical advantages in patients with unfavorable aortic arch morphology via the femoral approach and its excellent access site safety profile. Our objective was to analyze procedural success using radial access for carotid artery stenting as reported in the literature. Methods Three online databases were systematically searched following PRISMA guidelines for studies (n ≥20) using radial artery access for carotid artery stenting (1999-2018). Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the procedural success (successful stent placement with no requirement for crossover to femoral access), mortality, and complication rates associated with radial access. Results Seven eligible studies reported procedural success outcomes with a pooled meta-analysis rate of 90.8% (657/723; 95% CI 86.7% to 94.2%; I 2 =53.1%). Asymptomatic radial artery occlusion occurred in 5.9% (95% CI 4.1% to 8.0%; I 2 =0%) and forearm hematoma in 1.4% (95% CI 0.4% to 2.9%; I 2 =0%). Risk of minor stroke/transient ischemic attack was 1.9% (95% CI 0.6% to 3.8%; I 2 =42.3%) and major stroke was 1.0% (95% CI 0.4% to 1.8%; I 2 =0%). There were three deaths across the seven studies (0.6%; 95% CI 0.2% to 1.3%; I 2 =0%). The meta-analysis was limited by statistically significant heterogeneity for the primary outcome of procedural success. Conclusion Radial access for carotid artery stenting has a high procedural success rate with low rates of mortality, access site complications, and cerebrovascular complications. The potential benefits of this approach in patients with unfavorable aortic arch access should be explored in a prospective randomized trial.en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal of NeuroInterventional Surgery. Vol.12, No.1 (2020), 87-93en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014994en_US
dc.identifier.issn17598486en_US
dc.identifier.issn17598478en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85067344801en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/49662
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85067344801&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleProcedural success with radial access for carotid artery stenting: Systematic review and meta-analysisen_US
dc.typeReviewen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85067344801&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections