Therapeutic Neurointervention through Transradial Approach: Preliminary Experience from a Tertiary Care Center

IF 0.3 Q4 SURGERY Indian Journal of Neurosurgery Pub Date : 2022-12-23 DOI:10.1055/s-0042-1758778
V. Bhatia, Ajay Kumar, Mohd Yaqoob Wani, Navneet Singla, A. Prabhakar, M. Karthigeyan, Rajeev Chauhan
{"title":"Therapeutic Neurointervention through Transradial Approach: Preliminary Experience from a Tertiary Care Center","authors":"V. Bhatia, Ajay Kumar, Mohd Yaqoob Wani, Navneet Singla, A. Prabhakar, M. Karthigeyan, Rajeev Chauhan","doi":"10.1055/s-0042-1758778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aim  The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of radial access for therapeutic neurointervention procedures. Methods  The retrospective evaluation of 20 patients taken for therapeutic neurointervention through transradial access at our institute was done from July 2021 to April 2022. Results  Therapeutic neurointervention procedures were attempted in 20 patients (age, 24–74 years; mean age, 48.4 years; 13 (65%) females using a transradial approach. The radial artery's mean diameter was 2.135 mm. The right radial access was taken in 18 (90%) cases. Indications for treatment were ruptured aneurysm in 13 (65%), mechanical thrombectomy in 5 (25%), flow diversion for a recanalized aneurysm in 1 (5%), and balloon occlusion test in 1 (5%) case. The procedure was successful through the transradial approach in 18 (90%) procedures. Failure was seen in two cases that were completed after conversion to the transfemoral approach. The reason for access conversion was a severe spasm in both cases. No significant access site complications were seen in the study cohort. Conclusion  A radial access route is a promising approach for therapeutic interventions with a high success rate and minimal access site complications. Interventionists should get accustomed to this approach as primary or alternative access for neurointervention.","PeriodicalId":53938,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Neurosurgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1758778","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Aim  The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of radial access for therapeutic neurointervention procedures. Methods  The retrospective evaluation of 20 patients taken for therapeutic neurointervention through transradial access at our institute was done from July 2021 to April 2022. Results  Therapeutic neurointervention procedures were attempted in 20 patients (age, 24–74 years; mean age, 48.4 years; 13 (65%) females using a transradial approach. The radial artery's mean diameter was 2.135 mm. The right radial access was taken in 18 (90%) cases. Indications for treatment were ruptured aneurysm in 13 (65%), mechanical thrombectomy in 5 (25%), flow diversion for a recanalized aneurysm in 1 (5%), and balloon occlusion test in 1 (5%) case. The procedure was successful through the transradial approach in 18 (90%) procedures. Failure was seen in two cases that were completed after conversion to the transfemoral approach. The reason for access conversion was a severe spasm in both cases. No significant access site complications were seen in the study cohort. Conclusion  A radial access route is a promising approach for therapeutic interventions with a high success rate and minimal access site complications. Interventionists should get accustomed to this approach as primary or alternative access for neurointervention.
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
经放射状途径治疗性神经干预:来自三级保健中心的初步经验
摘要目的本研究的目的是评估放射通路在治疗性神经干预手术中的安全性和可行性。方法回顾性分析我院2021年7月至2022年4月经桡动脉通路治疗性神经干预的20例患者。结果20例患者(年龄24 ~ 74岁;平均年龄48.4岁;13例(65%)女性采用经桡骨入路。桡动脉平均直径2.135 mm。18例(90%)采用右桡骨通路。治疗指征为动脉瘤破裂13例(65%),机械取栓5例(25%),再通动脉瘤分流1例(5%),球囊闭塞试验1例(5%)。经桡骨入路18例(90%)手术成功。有2例患者在转经股动脉入路后手术失败。在这两种情况下,访问转换的原因都是严重的痉挛。在研究队列中未见明显的通路部位并发症。结论桡骨入路是一种成功率高、并发症少的治疗方法。介入医生应该习惯将这种方法作为神经介入的主要或替代途径。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Silent Threat: Unraveling the Rare Catastrophic Complication after Elective Cranioplasty Venous Hemorrhagic Infarct Leading to Delayed Brain Abscess Formation: A Case Report Trans-Disc Aspiration of Anterior Cervical Cysts Identification of Population-Specific Novel Protein Biomarkers and Possible Therapeutic Targets in Gliomas by Proteomics Approach First Thousand Cases of Intracranial Radiosurgery Treated with Gamma Knife at a Tertiary Care Hospital in India
×
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