A new iteration for the single-access large-bore technique during impella supported complex and high-risk coronary intervention: a case report

BACKGROUND Complex and high-risk coronary intervention (CHIP-PCI) and PCI in cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndrome is increasingly performed under mechanical circulatory support—so called protected PCI. Among the available options, Impella CP heart pump (ABIOMED) is percutaneously inserted over the femoral artery and typically requires a second arterial access to perform PCI, which further enhances the risk of vascular and bleeding complications. The single-access technique allows Impella CP placement and PCI performance through the same vascular access. When a 7-french system is desirable, only a long and entirely hydrophilic coated sheath has been previously used, which is not available in Europe. CASE SUMMARY A 85-year-old patient admitted with NSTE-ACS, severely reduced left ventricular function and three-vessel coronary artery disease underwent single access CHIP-PCI under Impella CP support. After a failed attempt to insert a standard 7-french long femoral sheath alongside the Impella catheter, we successfully introduced a 7.5-french sheathless guiding catheter and delivered the planned percutaneous treatment with the benefits conferred by a 7-french—rather than 6 - lumen catheter, without the need for an additional arterial access. DISCUSSION This is, to the best of our knowledge, the first case of CHIP-PCI performed under Impella support utilizing the single-access technique with a 7.5-french sheathless guiding catheter. Beyond advantages of the single-access technique in sparing time and avoiding vascular complications associated with gaining a second arterial access, the lower outer diameter of the sheathless catheter compared with standard 7-french sheaths may allow improved limb perfusion and lower chance of interference with the impella CP catheter.

Sheathless guiding catheter versus “slender” sheath/guiding catheter combination in acute coronary syndrome: a propensity-matched analysis of two downsized devices

Purpose We investigated the differences between a sheathless guiding catheter and a Glidesheath slender/guiding catheter combination regarding access-site complications in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods We enrolled consecutive 1108 patients undergoing transradial primary PCI for ACS at our hospital using either a 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheter (Sheathless group) or a 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination (Glidesheath group); 1:1 propensity score matching was performed, and 718 subjects (359 in each group) were included in the propensity-matched sample. Results Compared with the Sheathless group, the Glidesheath group had significantly less frequent ultrasound-diagnosed radial artery occlusion at 30 days (Sheathless: 4.7% vs. Glidesheath: 1.4%, p=0.015). No significant differences were observed in severe radial spasm (Sheathless: 1.4% vs. Glidesheath: 2.0%, p=0.77) or access-site bleeding (Sheathless: 9.8% vs. Glidesheath: 8.6%, p=0.70). Conclusion Thus, 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination is clearly more advantageous than 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheters for decreased risk of radial artery occlusion in transradial PCI for ACS. “Sheathless” vs. “Glidesheath slender” Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices

A Glidesheath slender (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) and a sheathless Eaucath guiding catheter (Asahi Intecc, Nagoya, Japan) are two major slender devices utilized in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate the differences in access-site complications between these devices in PCI for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). A total of 1108 consecutive patients who underwent transradial PCI for ACS were enrolled. Transradial PCI was performed using either a 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination (Glidesheath group) or a 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheter (Sheathless group); 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed, and 728 patients (364 in each group) were included in the propensity-matched population. In the matched patients, univariate analysis revealed that the Glidesheath group had less radial artery occlusion (RAO) at 30 days (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 4.1%, odds ratio (OR) = 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12–0.91, p=0.039), whereas no significant between-group differences were observed in severe radial spasm (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 1.9%, OR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.23–2.22, p=0.58) or access-site major bleeding (Glidesheath: 1.4% vs. Sheathless: 1.6%, OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.26–2.71, p=1.00). Multivariate analysis revealed that the choice for Glidesheath was significantly associated with less RAO (OR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.11–0.93, p=0.036). In conclusion, 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination is obviously more advantageous than 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheters for decreased risk of RAO. The potential low risk of RAO in our findings supports the adoption of the 7-Fr Glidesheath slender sheath/7-Fr guiding catheter combination in transradial PCI for ACS.

Sheathless Guiding Catheter from a Femoral Approach for Complex PCI- an Unusual Solution for an Often-Encountered Problem

Sheathless guiding catheters are a valuable tool in the catheterization labor and may assist the operator when dealing with heavily calcifies and tortuous vessels. Nevertheless, when hostile anatomy prevents successful PCI from the radial access, transfemoral use of sheathless guide can assist in overcoming these challenges in a safe manner.

P5611Feasibility of distal radial access for carotid interventions: the RADCAR-DISTAL pilot study

Aims The aim of our study was to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of the distal transradial approach (DTRA) for carotid artery stenting (CAS). Methods and results We included 209 consecutive patients (151 Trans-Radial Access (TRA) and 58 DTRA) treated in a single center by CAS with cerebral protection between 2016 and 2018. DTRA punctures were performed by ultrasound guidance, and the carotid artery cannulations were done using a 6.5 F coronary sheathless guiding catheter. The groups showed similar demographic profile regarding age, gender and comorbidities, however the proportion of symptomatic patients was significantly higher in the DTRA cohort (DTRA: 75,86% vs. TRA: 46.36% p<0.001). Procedural success rate was similarly high in both groups, while the overall complication rate was very low, with no major adverse events and only a few vascular complications. The cannulation times were similar, while the overall procedure length was slightly higher in the DTRA group. The cumulative X-ray dose was similarly low regardless the access used. Conclusion DTRA is a safe and effective alternative of conventional trans-radial approach for CAS, with a potential to further improve the patient comfort.

P1814A novel method of transradial approach for left ventricular endomyocardial biopsy

Background Left ventricular endomyocardial biopsy (LV-EMB) may offer a superior diagnostic yield compared with right ventricular endomyocardial biopsy (RV-EMB) in conditions predominantly affecting the LV. Recently, transradial way is used for LV-EMB, and it has lower complication rates and has an advantage of immediate post-procedural ambulation compared with transfemoral technique. Previous reports of transradial LV-EMB need relatively complicated sheathless guiding catheter exchanging. Purpose We aimed at finding a novel and easier transradial method with a 6F sheath and a 6F guiding catheter. Methods and results In this manuscript, we described a method that allowed interventional cardiologists to obtain LV-EMB via transradial access with a 6F sheath and a 6F guiding catheter. This technique was successfully conducted in 25 consecutive patients at our institution. The transradial success rate was 100% (25 of 25). Mild or moderate radial artery spasm occurred in only 1 (4%) patient, but no severe radial spasm was observed. All the patients were performed coronary angiography and left ventricular angiogram according to the indication, and they were performed EMB through the same radial sheaths without sheathless guiding catheter exchanging. Heparin was administered to 100% of patients at a dose of 5000IU. Median fluoroscopy time was 13.45min. Median total skin dose was 1478mGy. Median area product was 15486 cGy·cm2. All biopsy samples were graded as excellent quality. Immediate patient mobilization could be achieved in all patients. Radial artery patency was confirmed by doppler ultrasonography 24 hours after the sheath removal. There were no major complications (pericardial tamponade, life-threatening arrhythmia, cerebrovascular accident or death). Transradial LV-EMB with a 6F sheath Conclusions The present article demonstrates a result of feasibility, safety and efficacy of a novel transradial access for LV-EMB using a 6F sheath and a 6F guiding catheter. This is of clinical importance since this new technique may overcome the currently existing methods, and may be regarded as an interventional “one stop shop” technique.