Anatomic Snuffbox (Distal Radial Artery) and Radial Artery Access for Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms with FDA-Approved Flow Diverters

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Mann JT 3rd.,
   2. Cubeddu MG,
   3. Schneider JE, et al

   . Right radial access for PTCA: a prospective study demonstrates reduced complications and hospital charges. J Invasive Cardiol 1996;8(Suppl D):40D–44D pmid:10785786

   PubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Kiemeneij F,
   2. Laarman GJ,
   3. Odekerken D, et al

   . A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: the access study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;29:1269–75 doi:10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00064-8 pmid:9137223

   FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Agostoni P,
   2. Biondi-Zoccai GG,
   3. de Benedictis ML, et al

   . Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:349–56 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.04.034 pmid:15261930

   FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Jolly SS,
   2. Amlani S,
   3. Hamon M, et al

   . Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am Heart J 2009;157:132–40 doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2008.08.023 pmid:19081409

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Sciahbasi A,
   2. Pristipino C,
   3. Ambrosio G, et al

   . Arterial access-site-related outcomes of patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures for acute coronary syndromes (from the ComPaRison of Early Invasive and Conservative Treatment in Patients With Non-ST-ElevatiOn Acute Coronary Syndromes [PRESTO-ACS] Vascular Substudy). Am J Cardiol 2009;103:796–800 doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.11.049 pmid:19268734

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Valgimigli M,
   2. Gagnor A,
   3. Calabró P

   , et al. MATRIX Investigators. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2015;385:2465–76 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60292-6 pmid:25791214

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Mamas MA,
   2. Tosh J,
   3. Hulme W, et al

   . Health economic analysis of access site practice in England during changes in practice: insights from the British Cardiovascular Interventional Society. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2018;11:e004482 doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.004482 pmid:29743163

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Valgimigli M,
   2. Frigoli E,
   3. Leonardi S, et al

   ; MATRIX Investigators. Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2018;392:835–48 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31714-8 pmid:30153988

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Kok MM,
   2. Weernink MG,
   3. von Birgelen C, et al

   . Patient preference for radial versus femoral vascular access for elective coronary procedures: the PREVAS study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2018;91:17–24 doi:10.1002/ccd.27039pmid:28470994

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Satti SR,
    2. Vance AZ,
    3. Golwala SN, et al

    . Patient preference for transradial access over transfemoral access for cerebrovascular procedures. J Vasc Interv Neurol 2017;9:1–5 pmid:28702112

    PubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Khanna O,
    2. Sweid A,
    3. Mouchtouris N, et al

    . Radial artery catheterization for neuroendovascular procedures. Stroke 2019;50:2587–90 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025811 pmid:31311466

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Li Y,
    2. Chen SH,
    3. Spiotta Am, et al

    . Lower complication rates associated with transradial versus transfemoral flow diverting stent placement. J Neurointerv Surg 2020 June 2. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015992 pmid:32487766

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Horie K,
    2. Tada N,
    3. Isawa T, et al

    . A randomised comparison of incidence of radial artery occlusion and symptomatic radial artery spasm associated with elective transradial coronary intervention using 6.5 Fr SheathLess Eaucath guiding catheter vs. 6.0 Fr Glidesheath slender. Eurointervention 2018;13:2018–25 doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00239 pmid:28846541

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Starke RM,
    2. Snelling B,
    3. Al-Mufti F, et al

    ; Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery. Transarterial and transvenous access for neurointerventional surgery: report of the SNIS standards and guidelines committee. J Neurointerv Surg 2020;12:733–41 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015573 pmid:31818970

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Dietrich C,
    2. Hauck GH,
    3. Valvassori L, et al

    . Transradial access or Simmons shaped 8F guide enables delivery of flow diverters in patients with large intracranial aneurysm and type III aortic arch: technical case report. Neurosurgery 2013;73:onsE111–15 doi:10.1227/NEU.0b013e31827e0d67 pmid:23190630

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Daou B,
    2. Chalouhi N,
    3. Tjoumakaris S, et al

    . Alternative access for endovascular treatment of cerebrovascular diseases. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2016;145:89–95 doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.04.015 pmid:27131922

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Peitz GW,
    2. Kura B,
    3. Johnson JN, et al

    . Transradial approach for deployment of a flow diverter for an intracranial aneurysm in a patient with a type-3 aortic arch. J Vasc Interv Neurol 2017;9:42–44 pmid:29163748

    PubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Sweid A,
    2. Starke RM,
    3. Herial N

    , et al. Transradial approach for the treatment of brain aneurysms using flow diversion: feasibility, safety, and outcomes. J Neurosurg Sci 2019;63:509–17 doi:10.23736/S0390-5616.19.04761-1 pmid:31298509

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Chen SH,
    2. Snelling BM,
    3. Shah SS, et al

    . Transradial approach for flow diversion treatment of cerebral aneurysms: a multicenter study. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:796–800 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014620 pmid:30670622

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Raz E,
    2. Shapiro M,
    3. Buciuc R, et al

    . Radial artery access for treatment of posterior circulation aneurysms using the Pipeline embolization device: case series. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2019;17:340–47 doi:10.1093/ons/opy378 pmid:30668769

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Kühn AL,
    2. de Macedo Rodrigues K,
    3. Singh J, et al

    . Distal radial access in the anatomical snuffbox for neurointerventions: a feasibility, safety, and proof-of-concept study. J NeuroInterv Surg 2020;12:798–801 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015604 pmid:31915209

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Waqas M,
    2. Vakharia K,
    3. Dossani RH, et al

    . Transradial access for flow diversion of intracranial aneurysms: case series. Interv Neuroradiol 2020 July 5. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1177/1591019920938961 pmid:32623930

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Campeau L

    . Entry sites for coronary angiography and therapeutic interventions: from the proximal to the distal radial artery. Can J Cardiol 2001;17:319–25 pmid:11264565

    PubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Campeau L

    . Percutaneous radial artery approach for coronary angiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1989;16:3–7 doi:10.1002/ccd.1810160103 pmid:2912567

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Chase AJ,
    2. Fretz EB,
    3. Warburton WP, et al

    . Association of the arterial access site at angioplasty with transfusion and mortality: the M.O.R.T.A.L. study (Mortality benefit Of Reduced Transfusion after percutaneous coronary intervention via the Arm or Leg). Heart 2008;94:1019–25 doi:10.1136/hrt.2007.136390 pmid:8332059

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. Jolly SS,
    2. Yusuf S,
    3. Cairns J, et al

    ; RIVAL trial group. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet 2011;377:1409–20 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2 pmid:21470671

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    1. Alnasser SM,
    2. Bagai A,
    3. Jolly SS, et al

    . Transradial approach for coronary angiography and intervention in the elderly: a meta-analysis of 777,841 patients. Int J Cardiol 2017;228:45–51 doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.11.207 pmid:27863361

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Wang YB,
    2. Fu XH,
    3. Wang XC, et al

    . Randomized comparison of radial versus femoral approach for patients with STEMI undergoing early PCI following intravenous thrombolysis. J Invasive Cardiol 2012;24:412–16 pmid:22865313

    PubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Mitchell MD,
    2. Hong JA,
    3. Lee BY, et al

    . Systematic review and cost-benefit analysis of radial artery access for coronary angiography and intervention. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2012;5:454–62 doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.112.965269 pmid:22740010

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Pristipino C,
    2. Pelliccia F,
    3. Granatelli A, et al

    . Comparison of access-related bleeding complications in women versus men undergoing percutaneous coronary catheterization using the radial versus femoral artery. Am J Cardiol 2007;99:1216–21 doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.12.038 pmid:17478145

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    1. Snelling BM,
    2. Sur S,
    3. Shah SS, et al

    . Transradial cerebral angiography: techniques and outcomes. J Neurointerv Surg 2018;10:874–81 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013584 pmid:29311120

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    1. Zussman BM,
    2. Tonetti DA,
    3. Stone J, et al

    . A prospective study of the transradial approach for diagnostic cerebral arteriography. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:1045–49 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014686 pmid:30842303

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Patel P,
    2. Majmundar N,
    3. Bach I, et al

    . Distal transradial access in the anatomic snuffbox for diagnostic cerebral angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:1526–28 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6178 pmid:31467236

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    1. Haussen DC,
    2. Nogueira RG,
    3. DeSousa KG, et al

    . Transradial access in acute ischemic stroke intervention. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:247–50 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011519 pmid:25561585

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    1. Sur S,
    2. Snelling B,
    3. Khandelwal P, et al

    . Transradial approach for mechanical thrombectomy in anterior circulation large-vessel occlusion. Neurosurg Focus 2017;42:E13 doi:10.3171/2017.1.FOCUS16525 pmid:28366055

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Snelling BM,
    2. Sur S,
    3. Shah SS, et al

    . Transradial approach for complex anterior and posterior circulation interventions: technical nuances and feasibility of using current devices. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2019;17:293–302 doi:10.1093/ons/opy352 pmid:30496537

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    1. Almallouhi E,
    2. Leary J,
    3. Wessell J, et al

    . Fast-track incorporation of the transradial approach in endovascular neurointervention. J Neurointerv Surg 2020;12:176–80 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015127 pmid:31300534

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    1. Becske T,
    2. Kallmes DF,
    3. Saatci I, et al

    . Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology 2013;267:858–68 doi:10.1148/radiol.13120099 pmid:23418004

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
39. 39.↵
    1. Stella PR,
    2. Kiemeneij F,
    3. Laarman GJ, et al

    . Incidence and outcome of radial artery occlusion following transradial artery coronary angioplasty. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1997;40:156–58 doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0304(199702)40:2<156::AID-CCD7>3.0.CO;2-A pmid:9047055

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
40. 40.↵
    1. Nagai S,
    2. Abe S,
    3. Sato T, et al

    . Ultrasonic assessment of vascular complications in coronary angiography and angioplasty after transradial approach. Am J Cardiol 1999;83:180–86 doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00821-2 pmid:10073818

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
41. 41.↵
    1. Dahm JB,
    2. Vogelgesang D,
    3. Hummel A, et al

    . A randomized trial of 5 vs. 6 French transradial percutaneous coronary interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;57:172–6 doi:10.1002/ccd.10321 pmid:12357515

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
42. 42.↵
    1. Takeshita S,
    2. Asano H,
    3. Hata T, et al

    ; NAUSICA Trial Investigators. Comparison of frequency of radial artery occlusion after 4Fr versus 6Fr transradial coronary intervention (from the Novel Angioplasty USing Coronary Accessor Trial). Am J Cardiol 2014;113:1986–89 doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.03.040 pmid:24786357

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. Rashid M,
    2. Kwok CS,
    3. Pancholy S, et al

    . Radial artery occlusion after transradial interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e002686 doi:10.1161/jaha.115.002686 pmid:26811162

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
44. 44.↵
    1. Sinha SK,
    2. Jha MJ,
    3. Mishra V, et al

    . Radial artery occlusion: incidence, predictors and long-term outcome after transradial catheterization—clinico-Doppler ultrasound-based study (RAIL-TRAC study. Acta Cardiol 2017;72:318–27 doi:10.1080/00015385.2017.1305158 pmid:28636520

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Cauley R,
    2. Wu WW,
    3. Doval A, et al

    . Identifying complications and optimizing consultations following transradial arterial access for cardiac procedures. Ann Vasc Surg 2019;56:87–96 doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2018.07.064 pmid:30342206

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Brunet MC,
    2. Chen SH,
    3. Peterson EC

    . Transradial access for neurointerventions: management of access challenges and complications. J Neurointerv Surg 2020;12:82–86 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015145 pmid:31350370

    Abstract/FREE Full Text