Document Detail

Occasional-operator percutaneous brachial coronary angiography: first, do no arm.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  12357512     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
The percutaneous brachial approach to coronary angiography is perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be the easiest of the arm approaches. Predominantly femoral operators may therefore be encouraged to use the percutaneous brachial approach as an occasional procedure. We decided to investigate prospectively whether this was a reasonable strategy by examining outcome in patients who underwent percutaneous brachial cardiac catheterization by occasional brachial operators. Between October 1997 and 2000, 55 patients underwent percutaneous brachial coronary angiography (0.6% of coronary angiographies), aged 66 +/- 10 years, of whom 40 (73%) were male. Chief indications for a brachial approach were peripheral vascular disease in 35 (64%), failed femoral approach in 10 (18%), and orthopnoea in 5 (9%). The procedure was completed successfully in 46 patients (84%). Reasons for failure were failure of access (two), brachial artery spasm (one), inability to negotiate brachial/subclavian tortuosity (two), dissection of the brachial artery (two), and inability to intubate a vein graft (two). Six patients required catheterization from an alternative site (brachial arteriotomy in two, percutaneous transradial in two, femoral in two), with success in all. There were complications of varying severity in 20 patients (36%). Major complications were false aneurysm requiring surgical repair (one), large brachial hematoma requiring surgical exploration and arterial repair (one), and hematoma with clinical median nerve dysfunction for one month. Minor complications included need for repeat coronary angiography via alternative approach (six), weakness of radial pulse < 24 hr (two), brachial artery dissection without clinical sequelae (two), brachial artery spasm terminating procedure (one), and wound oozing (three). Percutaneous brachial coronary angiography is a hazardous procedure when undertaken by occasional brachial operators. Complications are unacceptably frequent. As with all practical procedures, complication rates are likely to be inversely proportional to operator volumes. Patients requiring an arm approach should be referred to operators with high-volume brachial or radial experience.
David J R Hildick-Smith; Zafar I Khan; Leonard M Shapiro; Michael C Petch
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions     Volume:  57     ISSN:  1522-1946     ISO Abbreviation:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv     Publication Date:  2002 Oct 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2002-10-01     Completed Date:  2002-12-24     Revised Date:  2004-11-17    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  100884139     Medline TA:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  161-5; discussion 166     Citation Subset:  IM    
Copyright Information:
Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Department of Cardiology, Papworth Hospital, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Brachial Artery
Clinical Competence
Coronary Angiography / adverse effects,  methods*
Heart Catheterization / methods*
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Intravascular ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography assessment of late in-stent restenosi...
Next Document:  Feasibility and efficacy of transradial access for coronary interventions in patients with acute myo...