Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Interventional Cardiology
Volume 2019, Article ID 7348167, 7 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7348167
Clinical Study

Randomized Comparison of Terumo® Coated Slender™ versus Terumo® Noncoated Traditional Sheath during Radial Angiography or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

1Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark
2Viborg Regional Hospital, Heibergs Alle 4, 8800 Viborg, Denmark

Correspondence should be addressed to Christian Juhl Terkelsen; kd.mr.ybjeks@neslekret.naitsirhc

Received 26 November 2018; Accepted 13 February 2019; Published 4 March 2019

Academic Editor: Matteo Tebaldi

Copyright © 2019 Birthe Sindberg et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. M. Hamon, C. Pristipino, C. Di Mario et al., “Consensus document on the radial approach in percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: position paper by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Working Groups on Acute Cardiac Care** and Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology,” EuroIntervention, vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 1242–1251, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. M. A. Kotowycz and V. Dzavik, “Radial artery patency after transradial catheterization,” Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 127–133, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. Aminian, D. Dolatabadi, P. Lefebvre et al., “Initial experience with the glidesheath slender for transradial coronary angiography and intervention: a feasibility study with prospective radial ultrasound follow-up,” Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 436–442, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. E. Akturk, E. Kurtoglu, N. Ermis et al., “Comparision of pain levels of transradial versus transfemoral coronary catheterization: a prospective and randomized study,” The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 140–146, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  5. E. Romagnoli, G. Biondi-Zoccai, A. Sciahbasi et al., “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,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 60, no. 24, pp. 2481–2489, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. S. S. Jolly, S. Yusuf, J. Cairns et al., “Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial,” The Lancet, vol. 377, no. 9775, pp. 1409–1420, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S. M. Alnasser, A. Bagai, S. S. Jolly et al., “Transradial approach for coronary angiography and intervention in the elderly: a meta-analysis of 777,841 patients,” International Journal of Cardiology, vol. 228, pp. 45–51, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. G. A. Hawker, S. Mian, T. Kendzerska, and M. French, “Measures of adult pain: visual analog scale for pain (VAS Pain), numeric rating scale for pain (NRS Pain), McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ), short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ), chronic pain grade scale (CPGS), short form-36 bodily pain scale (SF-36 BPS), and measure of intermittent and constant osteoarthritis pain (ICOAP),” Arthritis Care & Research, vol. 63, supplement 11, pp. S240–S252, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. M. A. Ferreira-Valente, J. L. Pais-Ribeiro, and M. P. Jensen, “Validity of four pain intensity rating scales,” PAIN, vol. 152, no. 10, pp. 2399–2404, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. S. Deftereos, G. Giannopoulos, K. Raisakis et al., “Moderate procedural sedation and opioid analgesia during transradial coronary interventions to prevent spasm: a prospective randomized study,” JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 267–273, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. I. Hizoh, Z. Majoros, L. Major et al., “Need for prophylactic application of verapamil in transradial coronary procedures: a randomized trial. The VITRIOL (is Verapamil In TransRadial Interventions OmittabLe?) trial,” Journal of the American Heart Association, vol. 3, no. 2, Article ID e000588, 2014. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. F. Yoshimachi, F. Kiemeneij, M. Masutani, T. Matsukage, A. Takahashi, and Y. Ikari, “Safety and feasibility of the new 5 Fr Glidesheath Slender,” Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 38–41, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. H. Deuling, R. P. Vermeulen, A. D. F. M. Van Den Heuvel, R. A. J. Schurer, and P. Van Der Harst, “A randomised controlled study of standard versus accelerated deflation of the Terumo radial band haemostasis device after transradial diagnostic cardiac catheterisation,” European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 344–351, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. A. Mamas, S. George, K. Ratib et al., “5-Fr sheathless transradial cardiac catheterization using conventional catheters and balloon assisted tracking; a new approach to downsizing,” Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 28–32, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. Rashid, C. S. Kwok, S. Pancholy et al., “Radial artery occlusion after transradial interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” Journal of the American Heart Association, vol. 5, no. 1, 2016. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. W. T. Ball, W. Sharieff, S. S. Jolly et al., “Characterization of operator learning curve for transradial coronary interventions,” Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 336–341, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus