Transulnar approach as an alternative to transradial approach in non-coronary intervention: safety, feasibility and technical factors

Purpose Transulnar access (TUA) has been shown to be an effective alternative to transradial access (TRA) for coronary intervention. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of TUA in patients undergoing visceral interventions in the setting of contraindication to TRA. Materials and Methods Patients who underwent visceral interventions via ulnar approach were included in the study. Outcome variables include technical success, access site and bleeding complications. Results From May 2014 to September 2016, TUA was attempted 17 times in 14 patients (mean age: 60 years; range: 27 to 81 years) for whom TRA was planned for visceral intervention, but contraindicated. Contraindication to TRA included Barbeau D waveform (n = 3), radial artery diameter <2 mm (n = 8), known radial loop (n = 2), high takeoff of the radial artery (n = 2), prior radial artery occlusion (RAO) (n = 1), and radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula (n = 1). Interventions included selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) (n = 4), SIRT mapping (n = 2), chemoembolization (n = 6), renal embolization (n = 1) and bland liver embolization (n = 4). Technical success was achieved in 94.1% (16/17 cases) with the single failure attributed to an inability to cannulate the target vessel due to vessel tortuosity, requiring ipsilateral femoral crossover. There were no major access site or bleeding complications. Minor adverse events include two access site hematomas, which were successfully treated with conservative management. Conclusions TUA for visceral interventions is a safe and effective alternative to femoral approach when TRA is contraindicated.

Selective Arterial Embolization of Liver Metastases from Gastrinomas: A Single-Centre Experience

Background. Gastrinomas are rare functional neuroendocrine tumors causing the Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES). At presentation, up to 25% of gastrinomas are metastasized, predominantly to the liver. Embolization of liver metastases might reduce symptoms of ZES although a postembolization syndrome can occur. In this study, the results of embolization are presented, and the literature results are described. Methods. From a prospective database of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, all patients with liver metastatic gastrinomas were selected if treated with arterial embolization. Primary outcome parameters were symptom reduction, complications, and response rate. The literature search was performed with these items. Results. Three patients were identified; two presented with synchronous liver metastases. All the three patients had symptoms of ZES before embolization. Postembolization syndrome occurred in two patients. Six months after embolization, all the 3 patients had a clinical and complete radiological response; a biochemical response was seen in 2/3 patients. From the literature, only a small number of gastrinoma patients treated with liver embolization for liver metastases were found, and similar results were described. Conclusion. Selective liver embolization is an effective and safe therapy for the treatment of liver metastatic gastrinomas in the reduction of ZES. Individual treatment strategies must be made for the optimal success rate.