top banner image  

topleft corner image     top right corner image
 


bullet

JACC Homepage JACC Imaging Homepage
Still not a subscriber to JACC Imaging or JACC Interventions?

     top nav image

     

J Am Coll Cardiol Intv, 2008; 1:379-386, doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2008.05.007
© 2008 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow View Related Cardiosource Journal Scan
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rao, S. V.
Right arrow Articles by Peterson, E. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rao, S. V.
Right arrow Articles by Peterson, E. D.

Trends in the Prevalence and Outcomes of Radial and Femoral Approaches to Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

A Report From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry

Sunil V. Rao, MD, FACC*,*, Fang-Shu Ou, MS*, Tracy Y. Wang, MD, MS*, Matthew T. Roe, MD, MHS, FACC*, Ralph Brindis, MD, MPH, FACC{dagger}, John S. Rumsfeld, MD, PhD, FACC{ddagger}, Eric D. Peterson, MD, MPH, FACC*

* The Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina
{dagger} Division of Cardiology, Oakland Kaiser Hospital, Oakland, California
{ddagger} Denver VA Medical Center, Denver, Colorado.


Figure 1
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 1 Proportion of PCI Cases Performed Via the Radial Artery

Proportion of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) cases performed via the radial artery approach (r-PCI) across sites.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 2 Trend in the Use of r-PCI Over Time in Key Subgroups

Trend in the use of the radial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention (r-PCI) over time in (A) the overall dataset; (B) patients age <75 and ≥75 years; (C) men and women; (D) patients with stable angina, non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

 

Figure 3
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 3 Unadjusted Rates of the Primary Outcomes of r-PCI and f-PCI

Unadjusted rates of procedure success, vascular complications, and bleeding complications between the radial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention (r-PCI) and the femoral approach to percutaneous coronary intervention (f-PCI).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Figure 4 Unadjusted Rates of Bleeding and Vascular Complications of r-PCI and f-PCI in Key Subgroups

Unadjusted rates of bleeding and vascular complications of r-PCI and f-PCI in key subgroups of age (A), gender (B), and indication for percutaneous coronary intervention (C). NSTE ACS = non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome; STEMI = ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; other abbreviations as in Figure 3.

 




 
   
 
home link current link search link archive link topics link cardiology careers link