182
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Modified Patent Hemostasis Strategy Based on the Platelet Counts for Transradial Access Chemoembolization in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Prospective Single-Center Study

ORCID Icon, , , , , , , , & ORCID Icon show all
Pages 687-695 | Received 03 Mar 2023, Accepted 14 Apr 2023, Published online: 21 Apr 2023

References

  • Van Meter C, Vasudevan A, Cuccerre JM, Schussler JM. Time to discharge following diagnostic coronary procedures via transradial artery approach: a comparison of Terumo band and StatSeal hemostasis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018;19(7Pt A):759–761. doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2018.03.009
  • Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. 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(9775):1409–1420. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2
  • Zhang X, Luo Y, Tsauo J, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral access without closure device for transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized trial. Eur Radiol. 2022;32(10):6812–6819. doi:10.1007/s00330-022-09038-1
  • Yamada R, Bracewell S, Bassaco B, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral arterial access in liver cancer embolization: randomized trial to assess patient satisfaction. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2018;29(1):38–43. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2017.08.024
  • Posham R, Biederman DM, Patel RS, et al. Transradial approach for noncoronary interventions: a single-center review of safety and feasibility in the first 1500 cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(2):159–166. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2015.10.026
  • Iezzi R, Posa A, Bilhim T, Guimaraes M. Most common misconceptions about transradial approach in interventional radiology: results from an international survey. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2021;27(5):649–653. doi:10.5152/dir.2021.20256
  • Rashid M, Kwok CS, Pancholy S, et al. Radial artery occlusion after transradial interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(1):e002686. doi:10.1161/JAHA.115.002686
  • Fernandez RS, Lee A. Effects of methods used to achieve hemostasis on radial artery occlusion following percutaneous coronary procedures: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2017;15(3):738–764. doi:10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-002964
  • Thakor AS, Alshammari MT, Liu DM, et al. Transradial access for interventional radiology: single-centre procedural and clinical outcome analysis. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2017;68(3):318–327. doi:10.1016/j.carj.2016.09.003
  • European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2018;69(1):182–236. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019
  • Heimbach JK, Kulik LM, Finn RS, et al. AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2018;67(1):358–380. doi:10.1002/hep.29086
  • Dai N, Xu DC, Hou L, Peng WH, Wei YD, Xu YW. A comparison of 2 devices for radial artery hemostasis after transradial coronary intervention. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015;30(3):192–196. doi:10.1097/JCN.0000000000000115
  • Bernat I, Aminian A, Pancholy S, et al. Best practices for the prevention of radial artery occlusion after transradial diagnostic angiography and intervention: an international consensus paper. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(22):2235–2246. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2019.07.043
  • Pacchioni A, Mugnolo A, Sanz Sanchez J, et al. Radial artery occlusion after conventional and distal radial access: impact of preserved flow and time-to-hemostasis in a propensity-score matching analysis of 1163 patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;99(3):827–835. doi:10.1002/ccd.30005
  • US Department of Health and Human Services; National Institutes of Health; National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0. Available from: https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm. Accessed October 1, 2019.
  • Petroglou D, Didagelos M, Chalikias G, et al. Manual versus mechanical compression of the radial artery after transradial coronary angiography: the MEMORY multicenter randomized trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11(11):1050–1058. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.042
  • Lavi S, Cheema A, Yadegari A, et al. Randomized trial of compression duration after transradial cardiac catheterization and intervention. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(2):e005029. doi:10.1161/JAHA.116.005029
  • Pancholy SB, Bernat I, Bertrand OF, Patel TM. Prevention of radial artery occlusion after transradial catheterization: the PROPHET-II randomized trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(19):1992–1999. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.020
  • Park JY, Kim JK, Cheon JE, Lee MC, Han HS. Meniscus stiffness measured with shear wave elastography is correlated with meniscus degeneration. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2020;46(2):297–304. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.10.014
  • Hadjivassiliou A, Cardarelli-Leite L, Jalal S, et al. Safety and efficacy of a truncated deflation algorithm for distal transradial access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020;31(8):1328–1333. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2020.02.027
  • Roberts JS, Niu J, Pastor-Cervantes JA. Comparison of hemostasis times with a chitosan-based hemostatic pad (Clo-Sur(Plus) Radial) vs mechanical compression (TR Band(R)) following transradial access: a pilot study. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019;20(10):871–874. doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2018.11.026
  • Campos MAC, Alves CMR, Tsunemi MH, Peterlini MAS, Avelar AFM. Randomized clinical study on radial artery compression time after elective coronary angiography. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2018;26:e3084. doi:10.1590/1518-8345.2584.3084
  • Titano JJ, Biederman DM, Marinelli BS, et al. Safety and feasibility of transradial access for visceral interventions in patients with thrombocytopenia. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(5):676–682. doi:10.1007/s00270-015-1264-3
  • Kis B, Mills M, Hoffe SE. Hepatic radioembolization from transradial access: initial experience and comparison to transfemoral access. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22(5):444–449. doi:10.5152/dir.2016.15571