Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Coronary angiography and angioplasty are commonly performed through the radial artery. In some patients, anatomical variations of the radial and brachial arteries, such as loops, increased tortuosity or sharp angulations may pose challenges to equipment advancement.
Both the hydrophilic guidewire 0,035'' approach and the "Serpentine" technique have been described in the literature as techniques for overcoming radial anatomical challenges, with the hydrophilic guidewire approach being the more commonly used method.
In practical terms, both techniques involve the use of the same standard materials, with differences relating mainly to operator handling and technical manipulation. This study does not introduce any experimental device, material, or treatment; instead, it aims to compare the established approach using a 0.035'' hydrophilic guidewire with the emerging " Serpentine" technique with respect to effectiveness, procedural time, and safety.
Transradial access (TRA) has become the preferred approach for diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), compared with transfemoral access (TFA). Contemporary guidelines on revascularization in both chronic and acute coronary syndromes (ACS) recommend TRA as the first-line strategy, primarily due to its reduced risk of complications.
Additional advantages of TRA include improved cost-effectiveness, shorter intensive care unit stay, shorter overall hospitalization, faster patient mobilization, and greater patient comfort. TRA has also been associated with reduced contrast use and a lower risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury.
Despite its advantages, TRA has limitations. It is associated with a modest increase in radiation exposure. A key drawback is the need for crossover to another access site, which is relatively common; however, this can be mitigated by operator experience and ultrasound guidance.
Anatomical variants are a major cause of procedural failure and crossover, occurring in 9-23% of patients. The most frequent variants include high origin of the radial artery from the brachial artery, arterial loops, and tortuosity of the radial or subclavian artery. Radial artery loops and severe tortuosity, observed in 4.2-13,1% of cases, are strongly associated with procedural failure (3.8-50%) and increased crossover rates. These anatomical challenges prolong procedural time, increase radiation exposure, and raise the risk of vascular complication.
Several techniques have been proposed to overcome these challenges. The most commonly adopted is the use of hydrophilic guidewires. Other techniques include mechanical straightening of tortuous segments from the operator, the use of angioplasty guidewires, microcatheters, balloon-assisted tracking (BAT), pigtail-assisted tracking (PAT), or switching to ulnar, transfemoral, or contralateral radial access.
Preservation of the transradial approach is critical, as it reduces complications, facilitates faster mobilization, and shortens hospital stay. The most common cause of TRA failure is the presence of loops and tortuosity in the radial or brachial artery. To date, no randomized trials have directly compared different strategies for overcoming these challenges. The novel "Serpentine" technique, which will be compared against the widely used "0.035" hydrophilic guidewire, could become an additional tool for interventional cardiologists-providing a reliable method for crossing loops and tortuous segments, with reduced equipment use and comparable outcomes in terms of procedure time, radiation exposure, contrast use, and local complications.
The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of the novel "Serpentine" technique with that of hydrophilic guidewires in navigating radial and brachial artery loops and tortuosity during coronary angiography and PCI via TRA.
The S-TRACK Trial will be designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study. Consecutive eligible patients undergoing coronary angiography via transradial access, and not meeting any exclusion criteria, will be screened for enrollment. After successful radial artery cannulation, patients who demonstrate resistance to guidewire or catheter advancement will undergo radial and/or brachial angiography to identify the underlying anatomical cause. Participants with angiographically confirmed anatomical variants-specifically loops, pronounced tortuosity, or sharp angulations-will be considered eligible. Once the variant is confirmed, and oral consent provided, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to arterial navigation using either the standard hydrophilic 0.035'' guidewire-first technique or the Serpentine technique. At the end of the procedure informed consent will be signed. The study will involve operators-interventional cardiologists who will have been trained in the technique.
Baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory parameters will be recorded, including age, sex, medical history, and indications for angiography. Additionally, the anatomical location of the loop or tortuosity will be recorded.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Serpentine Technique | Experimental | Participants will undergo transradial navigation of radial or brachial artery loops, tortuosity, or sharp angulation using the Serpentine catheter manipulation technique to facilitate coronary angiography or PCI. |
|
| Hydrophilic Technique | Active Comparator | Participants will undergo transradial navigation of radial or brachial artery loops, tortuosity, or sharp angulation using a standard 0.035-inch hydrophilic guidewire to facilitate coronary angiography or PCI. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serpentine Technique | Procedure | Catheter-based navigation technique using controlled rotational catheter manipulation to cross radial or brachial artery loops, tortuosity, or sharp angulation during transradial coronary angiography or PCI. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Successful crossing of anatomical obstacles and procedure completion | Successful crossing of radial/brachial artery loops or tortuosity with completion of coronary angiography or PCI. | During coronary angiography/PCI procedure, assessed up to 3 hours |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Total procedure time | Total procedure time until completion of coronary angiography or PCI. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Fluoroscopy time | Total fluoroscopy time measured during coronary angiography or PCI. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grigorios Tsigkas, MD, PhD | Contact | +306974466662 | gregtsig@hotmail.com |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Grigorios Tsigkas, MD, PhD | University Hospital of Patras | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University Hospital of Patras | Recruiting | Pátrai | 26504 | Greece |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 39210710 | Background | Vrints C, Andreotti F, Koskinas KC, Rossello X, Adamo M, Ainslie J, Banning AP, Budaj A, Buechel RR, Chiariello GA, Chieffo A, Christodorescu RM, Deaton C, Doenst T, Jones HW, Kunadian V, Mehilli J, Milojevic M, Piek JJ, Pugliese F, Rubboli A, Semb AG, Senior R, Ten Berg JM, Van Belle E, Van Craenenbroeck EM, Vidal-Perez R, Winther S; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2024 Sep 29;45(36):3415-3537. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae177. No abstract available. | |
| 37622654 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Hydrophilic Technique | Procedure | Navigation of radial or brachial artery loops, tortuosity, or sharp angulation using a 0.035-inch hydrophilic guidewire during transradial coronary angiography or PCI. |
|
| During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Radiation exposure | Cumulative radiation dose assessed by Air Kerma and Dose Area Product (DAP) during the procedure. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Contrast volume used | Total contrast medium volume used during coronary angiography or PCI. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Success rate of loop access per technique | Successful navigation of radial or brachial artery loops or tortuosity using the assigned technique. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Number of guidewires used | Total number of guidewires used during the procedure. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Number of catheters used | Total number of catheters used during coronary angiography or PCI. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Radial artery spasm | Occurrence of radial artery spasm during the procedure. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Procedure-related symptoms | Pain (VAS 0-10), paresthesia, or paresis occurring during the procedure. | During index procedure, assessed up to 3 hours. |
| Access-site vascular complications | Occurrence of post-procedural hematoma (EASY scale), pseudoaneurysm, arterial dissection, or compartment syndrome. | From procedure completion until discharge, assessed up to 7 days |
| Background |
| Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, Barbato E, Berry C, Chieffo A, Claeys MJ, Dan GA, Dweck MR, Galbraith M, Gilard M, Hinterbuchner L, Jankowska EA, Juni P, Kimura T, Kunadian V, Leosdottir M, Lorusso R, Pedretti RFE, Rigopoulos AG, Rubini Gimenez M, Thiele H, Vranckx P, Wassmann S, Wenger NK, Ibanez B; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2023 Oct 12;44(38):3720-3826. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad191. No abstract available. |
| 27372195 | Background | Ferrante G, Rao SV, Juni P, Da Costa BR, Reimers B, Condorelli G, Anzuini A, Jolly SS, Bertrand OF, Krucoff MW, Windecker S, Valgimigli M. Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Interventions Across the Entire Spectrum of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Jul 25;9(14):1419-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.04.014. Epub 2016 Jun 29. |
| 34020929 | Background | Meijers TA, Aminian A, van Wely M, Teeuwen K, Schmitz T, Dirksen MT, Rathore S, van der Schaaf RJ, Knaapen P, Dens J, Iglesias JF, Agostoni P, Roolvink V, Hermanides RS, van Royen N, van Leeuwen MAH. Randomized Comparison Between Radial and Femoral Large-Bore Access for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Jun 28;14(12):1293-1303. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.041. Epub 2021 May 18. |
| 21470671 | Background | Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, Niemela K, Xavier D, Widimsky P, Budaj A, Niemela M, Valentin V, Lewis BS, Avezum A, Steg PG, Rao SV, Gao P, Afzal R, Joyner CD, Chrolavicius S, Mehta SR; RIVAL trial group. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011 Apr 23;377(9775):1409-20. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60404-2. Epub 2011 Apr 4. |
| 25791214 | Background | Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabro P, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, Zaro T, Rubartelli P, Briguori C, Ando G, Repetto A, Limbruno U, Cortese B, Sganzerla P, Lupi A, Galli M, Colangelo S, Ierna S, Ausiello A, Presbitero P, Sardella G, Varbella F, Esposito G, Santarelli A, Tresoldi S, Nazzaro M, Zingarelli A, de Cesare N, Rigattieri S, Tosi P, Palmieri C, Brugaletta S, Rao SV, Heg D, Rothenbuhler M, Vranckx P, Juni P; MATRIX Investigators. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015 Jun 20;385(9986):2465-76. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60292-6. Epub 2015 Mar 16. |
| 20801852 | Background | Amoroso G, Kiemeneij F. Transradial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the next standard of care? Heart. 2010 Sep;96(17):1341-4. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2010.196824. |
| 30354598 | Background | Mason PJ, Shah B, Tamis-Holland JE, Bittl JA, Cohen MG, Safirstein J, Drachman DE, Valle JA, Rhodes D, Gilchrist IC; American Heart Association Interventional Cardiovascular Care Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease; and Council on Genomic and Precision Medicine. An Update on Radial Artery Access and Best Practices for Transradial Coronary Angiography and Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Sep;11(9):e000035. doi: 10.1161/HCV.0000000000000035. |
| 22858390 | Background | Romagnoli E, Biondi-Zoccai G, Sciahbasi A, Politi L, Rigattieri S, Pendenza G, Summaria F, Patrizi R, Borghi A, Di Russo C, Moretti C, Agostoni P, Loschiavo P, Lioy E, Sheiban I, Sangiorgi G. Radial versus femoral randomized investigation in ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Dec 18;60(24):2481-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.06.017. Epub 2012 Aug 1. |
| 25147030 | Background | Rao SV, Hess CN, Barham B, Aberle LH, Anstrom KJ, Patel TB, Jorgensen JP, Mazzaferri EL Jr, Jolly SS, Jacobs A, Newby LK, Gibson CM, Kong DF, Mehran R, Waksman R, Gilchrist IC, McCourt BJ, Messenger JC, Peterson ED, Harrington RA, Krucoff MW. A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Aug;7(8):857-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.04.007. |
| 24211309 | Background | Bernat I, Horak D, Stasek J, Mates M, Pesek J, Ostadal P, Hrabos V, Dusek J, Koza J, Sembera Z, Brtko M, Aschermann O, Smid M, Polansky P, Al Mawiri A, Vojacek J, Bis J, Costerousse O, Bertrand OF, Rokyta R. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by radial or femoral approach in a multicenter randomized clinical trial: the STEMI-RADIAL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Mar 18;63(10):964-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.08.1651. Epub 2013 Nov 21. |
| 9137223 | Background | Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, Slagboom T, van der Wieken R. A randomized comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches: the access study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997 May;29(6):1269-75. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00064-8. |
| 19081409 | Background | Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, Yusuf S, Mehta SR. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am Heart J. 2009 Jan;157(1):132-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.08.023. Epub 2008 Nov 1. |
| 15261930 | Background | Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GG, de Benedictis ML, Rigattieri S, Turri M, Anselmi M, Vassanelli C, Zardini P, Louvard Y, Hamon M. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Jul 21;44(2):349-56. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.04.034. |
| 34325876 | Background | Lee P, Liew D, Brennan A, Stub D, Lefkovits J, Reid CM, Zomer E. Cost-effectiveness of Radial Access Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 2021 Oct 1;156:44-51. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.06.034. Epub 2021 Jul 27. |
| 36036610 | Background | Gargiulo G, Giacoppo D, Jolly SS, Cairns J, Le May M, Bernat I, Romagnoli E, Rao SV, van Leeuwen MAH, Mehta SR, Bertrand OF, Wells GA, Meijers TA, Siontis GCM, Esposito G, Windecker S, Juni P, Valgimigli M; Radial Trialists' Collaboration. Effects on Mortality and Major Bleeding of Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access for Coronary Angiography or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data From 7 Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials. Circulation. 2022 Nov;146(18):1329-1343. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.061527. Epub 2022 Aug 29. |
| 26299236 | Background | Hess CN, Krucoff MW, Sheng S, Anstrom KJ, Barham WB, Gilchrist IC, Harrington RA, Jacobs AK, Mehran R, Messenger JC, Mark DB, Rao SV. Comparison of quality-of-life measures after radial versus femoral artery access for cardiac catheterization in women: Results of the Study of Access Site for Enhancement of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Women quality-of-life substudy. Am Heart J. 2015 Aug;170(2):371-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2015.04.024. Epub 2015 May 4. |
| 23453097 | Background | Safley DM, Amin AP, House JA, Baklanov D, Mills R, Giersiefen H, Bremer A, Marso SP. Comparison of costs between transradial and transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention: a cohort analysis from the Premier research database. Am Heart J. 2013 Mar;165(3):303-9.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.10.004. Epub 2012 Nov 15. |
| 23871512 | Background | Amin AP, House JA, Safley DM, Chhatriwalla AK, Giersiefen H, Bremer A, Hamon M, Baklanov DV, Aluko A, Wohns D, Mathias DW, Applegate RA, Cohen DJ, Marso SP. Costs of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Aug;6(8):827-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.04.014. Epub 2013 Jul 17. |
| 24169135 | Background | Park EY, Shroff AR, Crisco LV, Vidovich MI. A review of radiation exposures associated with radial cardiac catheterisation. EuroIntervention. 2013 Oct;9(6):745-53. doi: 10.4244/EIJV9I6A119. |
| 12891603 | Background | Barbeau GR. Radial loop and extreme vessel tortuosity in the transradial approach: advantage of hydrophilic-coated guidewires and catheters. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003 Aug;59(4):442-50. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10586. |
| 18977799 | Background | Lo TS, Nolan J, Fountzopoulos E, Behan M, Butler R, Hetherington SL, Vijayalakshmi K, Rajagopal R, Fraser D, Zaman A, Hildick-Smith D. Radial artery anomaly and its influence on transradial coronary procedural outcome. Heart. 2009 Mar;95(5):410-5. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2008.150474. Epub 2008 Oct 31. |
| 16649233 | Background | Valsecchi O, Vassileva A, Musumeci G, Rossini R, Tespili M, Guagliumi G, Mihalcsik L, Gavazzi A, Ferrazzi P. Failure of transradial approach during coronary interventions: anatomic considerations. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006 Jun;67(6):870-8. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20732. |
| 10751755 | Background | Yokoyama N, Takeshita S, Ochiai M, Koyama Y, Hoshino S, Isshiki T, Sato T. Anatomic variations of the radial artery in patients undergoing transradial coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000 Apr;49(4):357-62. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1522-726x(200004)49:43.0.co;2-z. |
| 15907410 | Background | Yoo BS, Yoon J, Ko JY, Kim JY, Lee SH, Hwang SO, Choe KH. Anatomical consideration of the radial artery for transradial coronary procedures: arterial diameter, branching anomaly and vessel tortuosity. Int J Cardiol. 2005 Jun 8;101(3):421-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2004.03.061. |
| 19781291 | Background | Nie B, Zhou YJ, Li GZ, Shi DM, Wang JL. Clinical study of arterial anatomic variations for transradial coronary procedure in Chinese population. Chin Med J (Engl). 2009 Sep 20;122(18):2097-102. |
| 22860990 | Background | Norgaz T, Gorgulu S, Dagdelen S. Arterial anatomic variations and its influence on transradial coronary procedural outcome. J Interv Cardiol. 2012 Aug;25(4):418-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2012.00693.x. |
| 20197630 | Background | Yan ZX, Zhou YJ, Zhao YX, Zhou ZM, Yang SW, Wang ZJ. Anatomical study of forearm arteries with ultrasound for percutaneous coronary procedures. Circ J. 2010 Apr;74(4):686-92. doi: 10.1253/circj.cj-09-0577. Epub 2010 Mar 3. |
| 23506576 | Background | Li L, Zeng ZY, Zhong JM, Wu XH, Zeng SY, Tang EW, Chen W, Sun YH. Features and variations of a radial artery approach in southern Chinese populations and their clinical significance in percutaneous coronary intervention. Chin Med J (Engl). 2013 Mar;126(6):1046-52. |
| 26058245 | Background | Ostojic Z, Bulum J, Ernst A, Strozzi M, Maric-Besic K. Frequency of radial artery anatomic variations in patients undergoing transradial heart catheterization. Acta Clin Croat. 2015 Mar;54(1):65-72. |
| 19616324 | Background | Burzotta F, Trani C, De Vita M, Crea F. A new operative classification of both anatomic vascular variants and physiopathologic conditions affecting transradial cardiovascular procedures. Int J Cardiol. 2010 Nov 5;145(1):120-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.06.025. Epub 2009 Jul 17. |
| 24123805 | Background | Patel T, Shah S, Pancholy S, Radadiya R, Deora S, Vyas C, Hamon M, Gilchrist IC. Working through complexities of radial and brachial vasculature during transradial approach. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Jun 1;83(7):1074-88. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25210. Epub 2013 Nov 25. |
| 19926044 | Background | Dehghani P, Mohammad A, Bajaj R, Hong T, Suen CM, Sharieff W, Chisholm RJ, Kutryk MJ, Fam NP, Cheema AN. Mechanism and predictors of failed transradial approach for percutaneous coronary interventions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009 Nov;2(11):1057-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2009.07.014. |
| 35334110 | Background | Kuzemczak M, Pawlowski T, Gil R. Manual straightening of a brachial loop - a potential solution for challenging anatomies. Kardiol Pol. 2022;80(5):619-620. doi: 10.33963/KP.a2022.0074. Epub 2022 Mar 25. No abstract available. |
| 22045093 | Background | Sarji R, Sricharoen N. Beyond the bend: a literature review and case report of radial artery loop. J Invasive Cardiol. 2011 Nov;23(11):E271-2. |
| 27316490 | Background | Garg N, Sahoo D, Goel PK. Pigtail assisted tracking of guide catheter for navigating the difficult radial: Overcoming the "razor effect". Indian Heart J. 2016 May-Jun;68(3):355-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2016.03.016. Epub 2016 Mar 26. |
| 26071302 | Background | Satheesh S, Subramanian A. How to do radial coronary angiogram? Indian Heart J. 2015 Mar-Apr;67(2):170-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2015.04.009. Epub 2015 May 14. No abstract available. |
| 32896494 | Background | Merella P, Lorenzoni G, Saderi L, Sotgiu G, Casu G. Vascular Assisted Tracking for Challenging Transradial Percutaneous Intervention. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2021 Aug;29:38-42. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.08.007. Epub 2020 Aug 8. |
| 33387994 | Background | Papadopoulos K, Kerner A, Yalonetsky S, Nikolsky E, Feld Y, Roguin A. Strategies to overcome challenges of transradial coronary angiography and intervention. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2020 Dec 30;21(4):501-505. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm.2020.04.252. |
| 33865510 | Background | Sawant AC, Rizik DG, Rao SV, Pershad A. Algorithms for challenging scenarios encountered in transradial intervention. Indian Heart J. 2021 Mar-Apr;73(2):149-155. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2020.09.012. Epub 2020 Sep 18. |