Arid
DOI10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2
Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial
Jolly, Sanjit S.1,2; Yusuf, Salim1,2; Cairns, John3; Niemela, Kari4,5; Xavier, Denis6; Widimsky, Petr7; Budaj, Andrzej8; Niemela, Matti9; Valentin, Vicent10; Lewis, Basil S.11; Avezum, Alvaro12; Steg, Philippe Gabriel13,14; Rao, Sunil V.15; Gao, Peggy1,2; Afzal, Rizwan1,2; Joyner, Campbell D.16; Chrolavicius, Susan1,2; Mehta, Shamir R.1,2
通讯作者Jolly, Sanjit S.
来源期刊LANCET
ISSN0140-6736
EISSN1474-547X
出版年2011
卷号377期号:9775页码:1409-1420
英文摘要

Background Small trials have suggested that radial vascular complications and bleeding compared with superior to femoral access in patients with acute angiography with possible intervention. access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces femoral access. We aimed to assess whether radial access was coronary syndromes (ACS) who were undergoing coronary


Methods The RadIal Vs femorAL access for coronary intervention (RIVAL) trial was a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Patients with ACS were randomly assigned (1:1) by a 24 h computerised central automated voice response system to radial or femoral artery access. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or non-coronary artery bypass graft (non-CABG)-related major bleeding at 30 days. Key secondary outcomes were death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; and non-CABG-related major bleeding at 30 days. A masked central committee adjudicated the primary outcome, components of the primary outcome, and stent thrombosis. All other outcomes were as reported by the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01014273.


Findings Between June 6, 2006, and Nov 3, 2010, 7021 patients were enrolled from 158 hospitals in 32 countries. 3507 patients were randomly assigned to radial access and 3514 to femoral access. The primary outcome occurred in 128 (3.7%) of 3507 patients in the radial access group compared with 139 (4.0%) of 3514 in the femoral access group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.72-1.17; p=0.50). Of the six prespecified subgroups, there was a significant interaction for the primary outcome with benefit for radial access in highest tertile volume radial centres (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.87; p=0.015) and in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (0.60, 0.38-0.94; p=0.026). The rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days was 112 (3.2%) of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 114 (3.2%) of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76-1.28; p=0 90). The rate of non-CABG-related major bleeding at 30 days was 24 (0.7%) of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 33 (0.9%) of 3514 patients in the femoral group (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.43-1.23; p=0. 23). At 30 days, 42 of 3507 patients in the radial group had large haematoma compared with 106 of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0-28-0.57; p<0.0001). Pseudoaneurysm needing closure occurred in seven of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 23 of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.13-0.71; p=0. 006).


Interpretation Radial and femoral approaches are both safe and effective for PCI. However, the lower rate of local vascular complications may be a reason to use the radial approach.


类型Article
语种英语
国家Canada ; Finland ; India ; Czech Republic ; Poland ; Spain ; Israel ; Brazil ; France ; USA
收录类别SCI-E
WOS记录号WOS:000289963000030
WOS关键词ACUTE MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION ; CURRENT-OASIS 7 ; TRANSFEMORAL APPROACH ; TRANSRADIAL APPROACH ; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES ; FACTORIAL TRIAL ; ASPIRIN ; IMPACT ; ANGIOPLASTY ; CLOPIDOGREL
WOS类目Medicine, General & Internal
WOS研究方向General & Internal Medicine
资源类型期刊论文
条目标识符http://119.78.100.177/qdio/handle/2XILL650/169538
作者单位1.McMaster Univ, Hamilton, ON, Canada;
2.Hamilton Hlth Sci, Populat Hlth Res Inst, Hamilton, ON, Canada;
3.Univ British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada;
4.Tampere Univ Hosp, Tampere, Finland;
5.Tampere Heart Ctr, Tampere, Finland;
6.St Johns Med Coll & Res Inst, Bangalore, Karnataka, India;
7.Charles Univ Prague, Hosp Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic;
8.Grochowski Hosp, Dept Cardiol, Postgrad Med Sch, Warsaw, Poland;
9.Univ Oulu, Oulu Univ Hosp, Oulu, Finland;
10.Hosp Univ Dr Peset, Valencia, Spain;
11.Lady Davis Carmel Med Ctr, Haifa, Israel;
12.Dante Pazzanese Inst Cardiol, Sao Paulo, Brazil;
13.Univ Paris 07, INSERM, Rech Clin Atherothrombose U698, Paris, France;
14.AP HP, Paris, France;
15.Duke Univ, Duke Clin Res Inst, Durham, NC USA;
16.Sunnybrook Hlth Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Jolly, Sanjit S.,Yusuf, Salim,Cairns, John,et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial[J],2011,377(9775):1409-1420.
APA Jolly, Sanjit S..,Yusuf, Salim.,Cairns, John.,Niemela, Kari.,Xavier, Denis.,...&Mehta, Shamir R..(2011).Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial.LANCET,377(9775),1409-1420.
MLA Jolly, Sanjit S.,et al."Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial".LANCET 377.9775(2011):1409-1420.
条目包含的文件
条目无相关文件。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Jolly, Sanjit S.]的文章
[Yusuf, Salim]的文章
[Cairns, John]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Jolly, Sanjit S.]的文章
[Yusuf, Salim]的文章
[Cairns, John]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Jolly, Sanjit S.]的文章
[Yusuf, Salim]的文章
[Cairns, John]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。