Safety and feasibility of repeated percutaneous transradial coronary intervention in the same route.

BACKGROUND The radial approach has been increasingly used as an alternative to femoral access. And more procedures using repeated transradial coronary intervention (r-TRI) are performed. However, few data about r-TRI has been obtained. Therefore, we investigated the safety and feasibility of r-TRI using the same route. METHODS A total of 423 consecutive eligible patients undergoing r-TRI were enrolled in the r-TRI group, and 846 patients with initial TRI (i-TRI) were assigned to the i-TRI group in a 2:1 matching ratio compared to r-TRI group. The primary endpoint included the success rate of the procedure and the incidence of vascular related complications. RESULTS The baseline clinical characteristics in the two groups were comparable. The success rate of procedures in the r-TRI and i-TRI was similar (96.0% vs. 97.5%, P = 0.130). In subgroup analysis (coronary angiography only or angiography with pecutaneous coronary intervention), similar results were also observed. The puncture numbers and incidence of radial artery spasm in the r-TRI group were significantly higher than in the i-TRI group (P = 0.024 and P < 0.001, respectively). The other procedural outcomes in the two groups were identical. With respect to the incidence of overall vascular related complication and independent events, there were no significant differences in spite of a higher incidence of radial artery occlusion (RAO) in the r-TRI group (RAO: 1.2% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.521). The patients in the i-TRI group had more comfortable feeling than patients in the r-TRI group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS R-TRI produces a comparable procedure success rate and incidence of vascular complication when compared to i-TRI. It should be considered as an acceptable and safe procedure.