GlideSheath Slender® Versus Conventional 6 French Arterial Sheath: Impact on the Distal Radial Artery Occlusion (SMART) (SMART)

GlideSheath Slender® Versus Conventional 6 French Arterial Sheath: Impact on the Distal Radial Artery Occlusion (SMART)

GlideSheath Slender® Versus Conventional 6 French Arterial Sheath: Impact on the Incidence of Distal Radial Artery Occlusion in Cardiovascular Intervention Via Distal Radial Artery (SMART)

Compared with conventional artery sheath (TERUMO, Introducer II ), GlideSheath Slender® has more smaller outer-side diameter. The investigators suspected that use of the GlideSheath Slender® can reduce the incidence of distal radial artery occlusion in cardiovascular intervention via dTRA approach.

Distal transradial artery (dTRA) approach has emerged as a new approach in cardiovascular intervention in recent years. Compared to the conventional radial artery (CRA) approach, the dTRA approach dramatically reduced the risk of radial artery occlusion (RAO). In recent years, the incidence of distal radial artery occlusion (dRAO) after dTRA intervention has been reported in the literature, ranged from 0.12% to 5.2%. Outside diameter of artery sheath may affect the incidence of dRAO. Retrospective study reported that an artery/ sheath ratio > 1.0 was least damaging to the vessel during coronary intervention via dTRA. Compared with conventional artery sheath (TERUMO, Introducer II ), 6 French GlideSheath Slender® has more smaller outer-side diameter (2.46mm vs. 2.62mm). The investigators suspected that use of the GlideSheath Slender can reduce the incidence of dRAO in cardiovascular intervention via dTRA approach.

Placement of 6 French conventional Sheath (TERUMO, Introducer II ) for cardiovascular intervention via distal radial artery

Visual analog scale is used to evaluate the pain during the placement of the sheath, which ranges from 0-10, and 0 meas no pain

The incidence of haematoma is evaluated by Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries Study criteria

Inclusion Criteria: Age ≥ 18 years Palpable distal radial and conventional radial artery Exclusion Criteria: Age ≥ 90years Height≥ 185cm Cardiogenic shock Contraindications to puncture at the puncture site

Kiemeneij F. Left distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography (ldTRA) and interventions (ldTRI). EuroIntervention. 2017 Sep 20;13(7):851-857. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00079.

Achim A, Kakonyi K, Jambrik Z, Nagy F, Toth J, Sasi V, Hausinger P, Nemes A, Varga A, Bertrand OF, Ruzsa Z. Distal Radial Artery Access for Coronary and Peripheral Procedures: A Multicenter Experience. J Clin Med. 2021 Dec 20;10(24):5974. doi: 10.3390/jcm10245974.

Tsigkas G, Papageorgiou A, Moulias A, Kalogeropoulos AP, Papageorgopoulou C, Apostolos A, Papanikolaou A, Vasilagkos G, Davlouros P. Distal or Traditional Transradial Access Site for Coronary Procedures: A Single-Center, Randomized Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Jan 10;15(1):22-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.09.037. Epub 2021 Dec 15.

Liang C, Han Q, Jia Y, Fan C, Qin G. Distal Transradial Access in Anatomical Snuffbox for Coronary Angiography and Intervention: An Updated Meta-Analysis. J Interv Cardiol. 2021 Jul 22;2021:7099044. doi: 10.1155/2021/7099044. eCollection 2021.

Cai G, Huang H, Li F, Shi G, Yu X, Yu L. Distal transradial access: a review of the feasibility and safety in cardiovascular angiography and intervention. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2020 Aug 5;20(1):356. doi: 10.1186/s12872-020-01625-8.

Naito T, Sawaoka T, Sasaki K, Iida K, Sakuraba S, Yokohama K, Sato H, Soma M, Okamura E, Harada T, Yoshimachi F. Evaluation of the diameter of the distal radial artery at the anatomical snuff box using ultrasound in Japanese patients. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2019 Oct;34(4):312-316. doi: 10.1007/s12928-018-00567-5. Epub 2019 Jan 7.