0 7

Cited 0 times in

Cited 0 times in

Right versus left distal radial access for coronary procedures in a large prospective multicenter registry: Insight from the KODRA registry

Authors
 Kim, Chan Joon  ;  Bu, Seonghyeon  ;  Lee, Jun-Won  ;  Yang, Tae-Hyun  ;  Seo, Jeong-Sook  ;  Kim, Yongcheol  ;  Lee, Bong-Ki  ;  Yoo, Sang-Yong  ;  Lee, Sang Yeub  ;  Cho, Sung Woo  ;  Park, Jin Sup  ;  Heo, Jung Ho  ;  Kim, Do Hoi  ;  Lee, Jin Bae  ;  Kim, Dong-Kie  ;  Park, Jino  ;  Bae, Jun Ho  ;  Lee, Sung-Yun  ;  Lee, Seung-Hwan  ;  Jin, Han-Young 
Citation
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, Vol.449, 2026-04 
Article Number
 134193 
Journal Title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
ISSN
 0167-5273 
Issue Date
2026-04
MeSH
Aged ; Coronary Angiography* / methods ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention* / methods ; Prospective Studies ; Punctures ; Radial Artery* / diagnostic imaging ; Radial Artery* / surgery ; Registries*
Keywords
Distal radial access ; Coronary angiography ; Percutaneous coronary intervention
Abstract
Background: Distal radial access (DRA) can be performed from either the right or left distal radial artery. However, comparative data between these two access routes remain limited. Methods: Using data from the KODRA registry, we compared procedural outcomes between right (RDRA) and left DRA (LDRA). The primary endpoint was access-site crossover after successful puncture. Secondary endpoints included successful coronary angiography (CAG) via the initial access site, puncture success, overall access-site crossover, DRA-related bleeding, and procedure-related times. Results: Among 4977 patients, RDRA showed a higher rate of access-site crossover (1.7% vs. 0.7%, p < 0.001). Rates of successful CAG (92.5% vs. 93.8%, p = 0.087), puncture success (94.2% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.670), overall access-site crossover (7.5% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.068), and DRA-related bleeding (3.0% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.446) were comparable between groups. The times for arterial puncture and CAG were significantly shorter with RDRA than with LDRA (88.2 +/- 115.4 s vs. 107.9 +/- 123.2 s; 8.6 +/- 6.7 min vs. 10.9 +/- 8.3 min; both p < 0.001), although procedural times were shorter when procedures were performed on the operators' preferred access side. In multivariable analysis, RDRA independently predicted access-site crossover after successful puncture (OR 2.156, 95% CI 1.184-3.926). Conclusions: Compared with LDRA, RDRA was associated with a higher risk of access-site crossover, whereas success rates of CAG and puncture, overall access-site crossover, and DRA-related bleeding were comparable. The shorter procedural times with RDRA were largely influenced by the operator's access-side preference.
DOI
10.1016/j.ijcard.2026.134193
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Yongcheol(김용철) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5568-4161
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/211303
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links