You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
New devices and techniques
Case series
Learning curves for transradial access versus transfemoral access in diagnostic cerebral angiography: a case series
  1. Michael K Tso1,2,
  2. Gary B Rajah1,2,
  3. Rimal H Dossani1,2,
  4. Michael J Meyer1,2,
  5. Matthew J McPheeters1,2,
  6. Kunal Vakharia1,2,
  7. Muhammad Waqas1,2,
  8. Kenneth V Snyder2,3,
  9. Elad I Levy2,4,
  10. Adnan H Siddiqui2,4,
  11. Jason M Davies2,5
  1. 1 Department of Neurosurgery, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, New York, USA
  2. 2 Department of Neurosurgery, Gates Vascular Institute, Buffalo, New York, USA
  3. 3 Department of Neurosurgery and Canon Stroke and Vascular Research Center, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, New York, USA
  4. 4 Department of Neurosurgery and Radiology and Canon Stroke and Vascular Research Center, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, New York, USA
  5. 5 Department of Neurosurgery and Bioinformatics and Canon Stroke and Vascular Research Center, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, New York, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Jason M Davies, Neurosurgery and Bioinformatics and Canon Stroke and Vascular Research Center, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Buffalo, New York, USA; jdavies{at}ubns.com

Abstract

Background The perception of a steep learning curve associated with transradial access has resulted in its limited adoption in neurointervention despite the demonstrated benefits, including decreased access-site complications.

Objective To compare learning curves of transradial versus transfemoral diagnostic cerebral angiograms obtained by five neurovascular fellows as primary operator.

Methods The first 100–150 consecutive transradial and transfemoral angiographic scans performed by each fellow between July 2017 and March 2020 were identified. Mean fluoroscopy time per artery injected (angiographic efficiency) was calculated as a marker of technical proficiency and compared for every 25 consecutive procedures performed (eg, 1–25, 26–50, 51–75).

Results We identified 1242 diagnostic angiograms, 607 transradial and 635 transfemoral. The radial cohort was older (64.3 years vs 62.3 years, p=0.01) and demonstrated better angiographic efficiency (3.4 min/vessel vs 3.7 min/vessel, p=0.03). For three fellows without previous endovascular experience, proficiency was obtained between 25 and 50 transfemoral angiograms. One fellow achieved proficiency after performing 25–50 transradial angiograms; and the two other fellows, in <25 transradial angiograms. The two fellows with previous experience had flattened learning curves for both access types. Two patients experienced transient neurologic symptoms postprocedure. Transradial angiograms were associated with significantly fewer access-site complications (3/607, 0.5% vs 22/635, 3.5%, p<0.01). Radial-to-femoral conversion occurred in 1.2% (7/607); femoral-to-radial conversion occurred in 0.3% (2/635). Over time, the proportion of transradial angiographic procedures increased.

Conclusion Technical proficiency improved significantly over time for both access types, typically requiring between 25 and 50 diagnostic angiograms to achieve asymptomatic improvement in efficiency. Reduced access-site complications and decreased fluoroscopy time were benefits associated with transradial angiography.

  • angiography
  • technique

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-017460

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @MikeTso1

    • Contributors MKT, GBR, RHD, EIL, KVS, AHS, JMD conceptualized the study. MKT, GBR, RHD, MJMe, MJMc, KV performed data acquisition. MKT, MJMe performed the data analysis. All authors interpreted data. MKT drafted the manuscript. All authors provided critical review of the manuscript and approval of the final version.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests EIL: shareholder/ownership interests: NeXtGen Biologics, RAPID Medical, Claret Medical, Cognition Medical, Imperative Care (formerly the Stroke Project), Rebound Therapeutics, StimMed, Three Rivers Medical; national principal investigator/steering committees: Medtronic (merged with Covidien Neurovascular) SWIFT Prime, and SWIFT Direct Trials; honoraria: Medtronic (training and lectures); consultant: Claret Medical, GLG Consulting, Guidepoint Global, Imperative Care, Medtronic, Rebound, StimMed; advisory board: Stryker (AIS clinical advisory board), NeXtGen Biologics, MEDX, Cognition Medical, Endostream Medical; site principal investigator: CONFIDENCE study (MicroVention), STRATIS Study—Sub I (Medtronic). AHS: financial interest/investor/stock options/ownership: Adona Medical, Inc, Amnis Therapeutics, (purchased by Boston Scientific October 2017), Blink TBI Inc., Buffalo Technology Partners Inc., Cerebrotech Medical Systems, Inc., Cognition Medical, Endostream Medical Ltd., Imperative Care, International Medical Distribution Partners, Neurovascular Diagnostics Inc., Q’Apel Medical Inc, Rebound Therapeutics Corp. (purchased 2019 by Integra Lifesciences, Corp), Rist Neurovascular Inc., Sense Diagnostics, Inc., Serenity Medical Inc., Silk Road Medical, Spinnaker Medical, Inc., StimMed, Synchron, Three Rivers Medical Inc., Vastrax, LLC, VICIS, Inc., Viseon Inc; consultant/advisory board: Amnis Therapeutics, Boston Scientific, Canon Medical Systems USA Inc., Cerebrotech Medical Systems Inc., Cerenovus, Corindus Inc., Endostream Medical Ltd., Imperative Care, Inc. Integra LifeSciences Corp., Medtronic, MicroVention, Minnetronix Neuro, Inc., Northwest University–DSMB chair for HEAT Trial, Penumbra, Q’Apel Medical Inc., Rapid Medical, Rebound Therapeutics Corp. (purchased by Integra LifeSciences Corp.), Serenity Medical Inc., Silk Road Medical, StimMed, Stryker, Three Rivers Medical, Inc., VasSol, W.L. Gore & Associates; principal investigator/steering committee for the following trials: Cerenovus NAPA and ARISE II; Medtronic SWIFT PRIME and SWIFT DIRECT; MicroVention FRED & CONFIDENCE; MUSC POSITIVE; and Penumbra 3D Separator, COMPASS, INVEST, TIGER. KVS: consulting and teaching for Canon Medical Systems Corporation, Penumbra Inc., Medtronic, and Jacobs Institute; co-founder: Neurovascular Diagnostics, Inc. JMD: research grant: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under award number KL2TR001413 to the University at Buffalo; consulting: Medtronic; honoraria: Neurotrauma Science, LLC; shareholder/ownership interests: Cerebrotech, RIST Neurovascular.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.