TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing the Safety and Feasibility of Endovascular Therapy via Transradial and Transfemoral Approaches in Patients with Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease
T2 - A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the Nationwide Registry
AU - Horie, Kazunori
AU - Takahara, Mitsuyoshi
AU - Iida, Osamu
AU - Kohsaka, Shun
AU - Nakama, Tatsuya
AU - Shinke, Toshiro
AU - Tada, Norio
AU - Amano, Tetsuya
AU - Kozuma, Ken
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Purpose: Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of performing endovascular therapy (EVT) for aortoiliac artery disease using transradial approach (TRA) as compared to transfemoral approach (TFA). Methods: We analyzed 9671 cases with symptomatic lower extremity artery disease due to aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) treated using EVT from a Japanese Nationwide EVT Registry between January and December 2021. We compared the baseline characteristics, procedural information, and 30-day outcomes of patients who received EVT only via TRA (n=863 [16.9%]) and those only via TFA (n=4255 [83.1%]) by using propensity score (PS) matching, after excluding those who required regular dialysis, those who underwent hybrid surgeries, and those who received EVT through 2 or more approach sites. Results: After matching, the final study population consisted of 862 matched patients with similar baseline characteristics in each group. Technical success rate was comparable between the 2 groups (99.3% vs. 99.3%, p>0.99). No significant differences were observed with respect to the composite of all-cause death within 48 hours after EVT and post-procedural complications within 30 days, including severe bleeding that required transfusion, revascularization procedures, urgent surgeries, cerebral infarction, and major limb amputation (0.2% vs. 0.7%, p=0.29). Transradial approach was associated with shorter operation time (85 vs. 90 minutes, p=0.016), but longer fluoroscopy time (26 vs. 20 minutes, p<0.001) and higher contrast agent volume (80 vs. 75 mL, p<0.001). Conclusion: After PS matching, TRA showed the comparable rates of successful EVT and 30-day complications in patients with AIOD compared to TFA. Transradial approach was found to be safe and be a viable alternative of TFA for the treatment of AIOD. Clinical Impact: The efficacy of transradial approach (TRA) is established in percutaneous coronary intervention; however, its safety and feasibility are unclear in endovascular therapy (EVT). We analyzed 9,671 cases with symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease treated using EVT from a Nationwide Registry to compare the 30-day outcomes of those who received EVT only via TRA (n = 863 [16.9%]and those only via TFA (n=4,255 [83.1%]) by using propensity score matching. Technical success rate (99.3% vs. 99.3%, p > 0.99) and 30-day complications (0.2% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.29) were comparable between the two groups. EVT via TRA could be performed safely.
AB - Purpose: Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of performing endovascular therapy (EVT) for aortoiliac artery disease using transradial approach (TRA) as compared to transfemoral approach (TFA). Methods: We analyzed 9671 cases with symptomatic lower extremity artery disease due to aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) treated using EVT from a Japanese Nationwide EVT Registry between January and December 2021. We compared the baseline characteristics, procedural information, and 30-day outcomes of patients who received EVT only via TRA (n=863 [16.9%]) and those only via TFA (n=4255 [83.1%]) by using propensity score (PS) matching, after excluding those who required regular dialysis, those who underwent hybrid surgeries, and those who received EVT through 2 or more approach sites. Results: After matching, the final study population consisted of 862 matched patients with similar baseline characteristics in each group. Technical success rate was comparable between the 2 groups (99.3% vs. 99.3%, p>0.99). No significant differences were observed with respect to the composite of all-cause death within 48 hours after EVT and post-procedural complications within 30 days, including severe bleeding that required transfusion, revascularization procedures, urgent surgeries, cerebral infarction, and major limb amputation (0.2% vs. 0.7%, p=0.29). Transradial approach was associated with shorter operation time (85 vs. 90 minutes, p=0.016), but longer fluoroscopy time (26 vs. 20 minutes, p<0.001) and higher contrast agent volume (80 vs. 75 mL, p<0.001). Conclusion: After PS matching, TRA showed the comparable rates of successful EVT and 30-day complications in patients with AIOD compared to TFA. Transradial approach was found to be safe and be a viable alternative of TFA for the treatment of AIOD. Clinical Impact: The efficacy of transradial approach (TRA) is established in percutaneous coronary intervention; however, its safety and feasibility are unclear in endovascular therapy (EVT). We analyzed 9,671 cases with symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease treated using EVT from a Nationwide Registry to compare the 30-day outcomes of those who received EVT only via TRA (n = 863 [16.9%]and those only via TFA (n=4,255 [83.1%]) by using propensity score matching. Technical success rate (99.3% vs. 99.3%, p > 0.99) and 30-day complications (0.2% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.29) were comparable between the two groups. EVT via TRA could be performed safely.
KW - aortoiliac lesions
KW - endovascular therapy
KW - lower extremity artery disease
KW - transradial approach
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85165637933
U2 - 10.1177/15266028231187625
DO - 10.1177/15266028231187625
M3 - 記事
C2 - 37476979
AN - SCOPUS:85165637933
SN - 1526-6028
VL - 32
SP - 756
EP - 765
JO - Journal of Endovascular Therapy
JF - Journal of Endovascular Therapy
IS - 3
ER -