“…At the end, the currently hot question for TRI is whether the left radial or the right radial approach is better for lower radiation exposure, number of catheter or guides used, etc. Recent publications in 2011–2013 showed strong data favoring the left radial approach with lower radiation exposure (specially at the wrist) to the operators and patients and ease for use of equipment without difference in the volume of contrast . In our study, as many operators changed from the TF approach to the TR approach at the beginning of the enrollment period, the majority of operators used the right radial approach.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 49%
“…Recent publications in 2011-2013 showed strong data favoring the left radial approach with lower radiation exposure (specially at the wrist) to the operators and patients and ease for use of equipment without difference in the volume of contrast. [25][26][27][28][29] In our study, as many operators changed from the TF approach to the TR approach at the beginning of the enrollment period, the majority of operators used the right radial approach. With the results of new data favoring the left radial approach, many operators changed their right radial to the left radial approach and this will be a hot topic to be studied and published in a near future.…”
As compared to TFI, TRI for 3VD intervention is feasible, safe, and associated with similar procedural success, shorter hospitalization, reduced bleeding, lower incidence of death, and comparable long-term efficacy.
“…At the end, the currently hot question for TRI is whether the left radial or the right radial approach is better for lower radiation exposure, number of catheter or guides used, etc. Recent publications in 2011–2013 showed strong data favoring the left radial approach with lower radiation exposure (specially at the wrist) to the operators and patients and ease for use of equipment without difference in the volume of contrast . In our study, as many operators changed from the TF approach to the TR approach at the beginning of the enrollment period, the majority of operators used the right radial approach.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 49%
“…Recent publications in 2011-2013 showed strong data favoring the left radial approach with lower radiation exposure (specially at the wrist) to the operators and patients and ease for use of equipment without difference in the volume of contrast. [25][26][27][28][29] In our study, as many operators changed from the TF approach to the TR approach at the beginning of the enrollment period, the majority of operators used the right radial approach. With the results of new data favoring the left radial approach, many operators changed their right radial to the left radial approach and this will be a hot topic to be studied and published in a near future.…”
As compared to TFI, TRI for 3VD intervention is feasible, safe, and associated with similar procedural success, shorter hospitalization, reduced bleeding, lower incidence of death, and comparable long-term efficacy.
“…Nevertheless, in the OPERA randomized study no significant differences were observed in DAP, fluoroscopy time and contrast volume despite 3 out of 5 operators were not expert in trans-radial approach (less than 100 procedures performed by each operator) [17]. Catheter shapes appositely designed for trans-radial approach are commercially available and were shown to be associated with lower procedural time when used by RR as compared to LR [18]. However, according to a recent worldwide survey [4], these catheters are rarely used, and most operators prefer to use standard femoral catheters for both diagnostic angiography and PCI.…”
“…More recently, radial artery access is also linked to reduced mortality in comparison to femoral access in patients with acute myocardial infarction . There are a limited number of studies comparing the left versus right radial approach for coronary procedures . The right radial approach is traditionally favored by many operators, primarily because of associated ease with the standard access setup .…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.