Incidence of radial artery occlusion in radial angiography compared with snuffbox angiography

Background: Transradial access is one of the main access techniques in angiography. This method is technically more difficult as it is associated with radial artery occlusion. Radial artery cannulation from the dorsal surface of the hand in the snuffbox area has been introduced as a suitable solution to overcome some of the disadvantages of the standard radial artery method. This study was conducted to compare the incidence of radial artery occlusion and other complications in the two methods. Methods: This study was conducted on 100 patients Who were referred to the Imam Hospital in Ahvaz from 22 September 2020 to 19 Mach 2021. 50 patients underwent angiography with normal radial artery access and 50 patients underwent snuffbox angiography. Basic characteristics including age, sex, underlying disease (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia), family history of coronary artery disease, medical history including chronic coronary artery disease, stable ischemic heart disease, smoking, and LVEF, and also the length of hospital stay was also collected and recorded. All subjects in the two groups underwent radial artery ultrasound in the forearm and snuffbox 24 hours after angiography. Also, angiographic complications including radial artery occlusion (thrombosis), pain, hematoma and anesthesia were recorded. Results: In the present study, the mean age in the two groups was similar (about 50-60 years). The distribution of sex, diabetes, weight, height and blood pressure was homogeneous in both groups. There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of thrombosis and pain between the two groups. The results of this study showed that in the snuffbox angiography group, the number of uncomplicated cases was significantly more than the radial angiography group and in the snuffbox angiography group, the number of postoperative pain and thrombosis cases was significantly lower. The length of hospital stay in the Snuffbox group was shorter than the radial group, but there was no statistically significant difference. Conclusion: Snuffbox angiography has fewer complications compared to the usual transradial method, so it can be used as a safe method for angiography.