Left radial vs right femoral: comparison between arterial accesses in c-TACE procedures in terms of operator radiations exposure and patient comfort.

IF 9.7 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Radiologia Medica Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI:10.1007/s11547-024-01906-8
Francesco Giurazza, Antonio Vizzuso, Tiziana Capussela, Fortuna De Martino, Valentina Pirozzi Palmese, Gianluigi Giorgetti, Fabio Corvino, Anna Maria Ierardi, Pierpaolo Biondetti, Pierleone Lucatelli, Emanuela Giampalma, Gianpaolo Carrafiello, Raffaella Niola
{"title":"Left radial vs right femoral: comparison between arterial accesses in c-TACE procedures in terms of operator radiations exposure and patient comfort.","authors":"Francesco Giurazza, Antonio Vizzuso, Tiziana Capussela, Fortuna De Martino, Valentina Pirozzi Palmese, Gianluigi Giorgetti, Fabio Corvino, Anna Maria Ierardi, Pierpaolo Biondetti, Pierleone Lucatelli, Emanuela Giampalma, Gianpaolo Carrafiello, Raffaella Niola","doi":"10.1007/s11547-024-01906-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This multicenter prospective study aims to compare transradial access versus transfemoral access in conventional transarterial chemoembolization (c-TACE) procedures, focusing on operators radiations exposure, patients comfort, technical success and vascular access complications.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients were affected by hepatocellularcarcinoma (HCC) in intermediate stage or previous stages unfit for ablation and/or surgery; they were randomized into two groups according to arterial access site (Group F: right femoral access in standard position; Group R: radial access with left arm abduced 90°). Overall fluoroscopy time was recorded. Eight thermoluminescence dosimeters were positioned immediately before each procedure to monitor radiation doses. Technical success was intended as complete HCC nodules lipiodolization at final plain cone-beam CT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group F included 23 patients, while group R 19. Mean fluoroscopy time was lower in group F but difference was not statistically significant (p-value > 0.05). In terms of operators radiations exposure, no significant differences were found (p-value > 0.05). Technical success was obtained in 81.5% in group F and 84.8% in group R, without significant differences (p-value > 0.05). Patients discomfort was significantly (p-value < 0.05) higher in group F. Concerning minor complications, no statistical differences were appreciated (p-value > 0.05); no major complications occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, no statistical differences were observed in terms of operators radiations exposure, fluoroscopy time and technical success during c-TACE performed with left radial access compared to right femoral access; patients comfort was significantly better with radial access. These data should lead interventional radiologists to favor radial access in c-TACE interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":20817,"journal":{"name":"Radiologia Medica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiologia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-024-01906-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This multicenter prospective study aims to compare transradial access versus transfemoral access in conventional transarterial chemoembolization (c-TACE) procedures, focusing on operators radiations exposure, patients comfort, technical success and vascular access complications.

Materials and methods: Patients were affected by hepatocellularcarcinoma (HCC) in intermediate stage or previous stages unfit for ablation and/or surgery; they were randomized into two groups according to arterial access site (Group F: right femoral access in standard position; Group R: radial access with left arm abduced 90°). Overall fluoroscopy time was recorded. Eight thermoluminescence dosimeters were positioned immediately before each procedure to monitor radiation doses. Technical success was intended as complete HCC nodules lipiodolization at final plain cone-beam CT.

Results: Group F included 23 patients, while group R 19. Mean fluoroscopy time was lower in group F but difference was not statistically significant (p-value > 0.05). In terms of operators radiations exposure, no significant differences were found (p-value > 0.05). Technical success was obtained in 81.5% in group F and 84.8% in group R, without significant differences (p-value > 0.05). Patients discomfort was significantly (p-value < 0.05) higher in group F. Concerning minor complications, no statistical differences were appreciated (p-value > 0.05); no major complications occurred.

Conclusions: In this study, no statistical differences were observed in terms of operators radiations exposure, fluoroscopy time and technical success during c-TACE performed with left radial access compared to right femoral access; patients comfort was significantly better with radial access. These data should lead interventional radiologists to favor radial access in c-TACE interventions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
左桡动脉与右股动脉:c-TACE 手术中动脉通路在操作者辐射暴露和患者舒适度方面的比较。
目的:这项多中心前瞻性研究旨在比较经桡动脉入路与经股动脉入路在传统经动脉化疗栓塞术(c-TACE)中的应用,重点关注操作者的辐射暴露、患者舒适度、技术成功率和血管入路并发症:患者均为肝细胞癌(HCC)中期或前期患者,不适合消融和/或手术;根据动脉入路部位随机分为两组(F组:标准体位右股动脉入路;R组:左臂外展90°的桡动脉入路)。记录整个透视时间。每次手术前都会立即放置八个热释光剂量计,以监测辐射剂量。技术成功是指在最终的锥形束 CT 平片上完成 HCC 结节脂肪碘化:结果:F组包括23名患者,R组包括19名患者。F 组的平均透视时间较短,但差异无统计学意义(P 值 > 0.05)。在操作人员所受辐射量方面,两组无明显差异(P 值 > 0.05)。技术成功率方面,F 组为 81.5%,R 组为 84.8%,无明显差异(P 值 > 0.05)。患者不适感明显(P 值为 0.05);无重大并发症发生:在这项研究中,使用左侧桡动脉入路与右侧股动脉入路进行 c-TACE 手术时,在操作者的放射线暴露、透视时间和技术成功率方面没有统计学差异;使用桡动脉入路时,患者的舒适度明显更好。这些数据表明,介入放射科医生在进行c-TACE介入治疗时更倾向于使用桡动脉入路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Radiologia Medica
Radiologia Medica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
7.90%
发文量
133
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Felice Perussia founded La radiologia medica in 1914. It is a peer-reviewed journal and serves as the official journal of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM). The primary purpose of the journal is to disseminate information related to Radiology, especially advancements in diagnostic imaging and related disciplines. La radiologia medica welcomes original research on both fundamental and clinical aspects of modern radiology, with a particular focus on diagnostic and interventional imaging techniques. It also covers topics such as radiotherapy, nuclear medicine, radiobiology, health physics, and artificial intelligence in the context of clinical implications. The journal includes various types of contributions such as original articles, review articles, editorials, short reports, and letters to the editor. With an esteemed Editorial Board and a selection of insightful reports, the journal is an indispensable resource for radiologists and professionals in related fields. Ultimately, La radiologia medica aims to serve as a platform for international collaboration and knowledge sharing within the radiological community.
期刊最新文献
Automated detection of bone lesions using CT and MRI: a systematic review. Left radial vs right femoral: comparison between arterial accesses in c-TACE procedures in terms of operator radiations exposure and patient comfort. Are background breast parenchymal features on preoperative breast MRI associated with disease-free survival in patients with invasive breast cancer? The missed chapter on midfoot: Chopart injuries. A preliminary study of developing an MRI-based model for postoperative recurrence prediction and treatment direction of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1