Radial vs femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention: temporal trends and outcomes in the USA
European Heart Journal

Abstract
Radial access site for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is recommended by clinical practice guidelines because of superior outcomes compared with femoral access site. Historically, the adoption of radial access site in the USA has lagged behind much of the rest of the world, but contemporary data on access site selection across the spectrum of clinical presentations and its association with outcomes are lacking.
A retrospective cohort study from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's CathPCI Registry was conducted including PCIs performed between 1 January 2013 and 30 June 2022. The comparative safety of radial vs femoral access site for PCI was evaluated with instrumental variable analysis, a technique that can be used to support causal inference, exploiting operator variation in access site preferences as the instrumental variable.
Overall, 6 658 479 PCI procedures were performed during the study period, of which 40.4% (
Over the past decade, use of radial access site for PCI has increased 2.8-fold in the USA and now represents the dominant form of access site across all procedural indications. Based on instrumental variable analyses, PCI with radial access site had lower rates of in-hospital mortality, major access site bleeding, and other major vascular complications compared with femoral access site but a slightly higher risk of ischaemic stroke in contemporary practice.
Contributors

Reza Fazel
Author

Sunil V Rao
Author

Eric A Secemsky
Author

Rajesh V Swaminathan
Author

Pratik Manandhar
Author

Jennifer A Rymer
Author

Daniel M Wojdyla
Author

Robert W Yeh
Author
You may be interested in
