2000
DOI: 10.1002/1522-726x(200011)51:3<287::aid-ccd8>3.0.co;2-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transradial cardiac catheterization in elderly patients

Abstract: The safety and efficacy of transradial cardiac catheterization in elderly patients is unknown. This study examines procedure success rates for transradial catheterization in appropriately selected patients < 70 (n = 195) and >/= 70 (n = 83) years old. Elderly patients were less likely to be selected for the transradial approach (46% vs. 61%; P = 0.05). Although patients >/= 70 years old were more often female (39.7% vs. 24.1%; P = 0.008) and had a smaller body surface area (1.89 +/- 0.18 vs. 2.01 +/- 0.24 m2; … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall, the results of this meta-analysis may be extrapolated to the majority of patients undergoing coronary procedures, as indeed all the clinical settings have been evaluated, ranging from elective diagnostic catheterization to elective PTCA or stenting to urgent PCI. In fact, these data have been also confirmed by several observational registries or retrospective studies, showing the radial approach to be safe and feasible in a large part of clinical practice (42)(43)(44) and also in the case of aggressive pharmacologic treatments such as glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (8) and oral anticoagulants (45). In addition, the randomized to screened ratio of patients enrolled was quite high (ϳ42%), and the main reasons for exclusion were principally related to the presence of unstable symptoms, when an elective procedure was planned, or to the planned utilization of a device different from the one considered in the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, the results of this meta-analysis may be extrapolated to the majority of patients undergoing coronary procedures, as indeed all the clinical settings have been evaluated, ranging from elective diagnostic catheterization to elective PTCA or stenting to urgent PCI. In fact, these data have been also confirmed by several observational registries or retrospective studies, showing the radial approach to be safe and feasible in a large part of clinical practice (42)(43)(44) and also in the case of aggressive pharmacologic treatments such as glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (8) and oral anticoagulants (45). In addition, the randomized to screened ratio of patients enrolled was quite high (ϳ42%), and the main reasons for exclusion were principally related to the presence of unstable symptoms, when an elective procedure was planned, or to the planned utilization of a device different from the one considered in the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Radial artery has become the most popular vascular access route for coronary interventions with a markedly decreased incidence of major access-site complications and early patient ambulation compared to transfemoral approach [1][2][3][4][5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the preceding two decades, the transradial approach for coronary interventions has proven to be safe and feasible in different clinical situations with a markedly decreased incidence of major access-site complications and early patient ambulation compared to transfemoral approach [1][2][3][4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%