SynthesisMedicine2015
Clinical and Procedural Outcomes of 5-French versus 6-French Sheaths in Transradial Coronary Interventions.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differences in coagulopathy indices in patients with severe versus non-severe COVID-19: a meta-analysis of 35 studies and 6427 patients.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Long-term outcome of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of RCTs.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Procedural Characteristics and Safety of Slender Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Slender Is Better.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Observational
- Safety and efficacy of using a large bore guide catheter through a short 8-Fr sheath for transradial neurointerventional procedures.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Transradial Approach for Neurovascular Interventions : A Literature Review.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2025Article
- Treatment and Management of Upper Extremity Dysfunction Following Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Prospective Cohort Study.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Carotid Artery Stenting Using Five-French Distal Radial Vascular Access.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Simultaneous Radial and Ipsilateral Ulnar Artery Compression versus Isolated Radial Artery Compression after Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and/or Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Common Calcified Femoral Artery Rupture After Intravascular Lithotripsy for TAVR Implantation.JACC. Case reports · 2020Article
- Standard Versus Ultrasound-Guided Cannulation of the Femoral Artery in Patients Undergoing Invasive Procedures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients for the Treatment of Severe Aortic Stenosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Transradial approach and its variations for neurointerventional procedures: Literature review.Surgical neurology international · 2020Review
- Slender Sheath/Guiding Catheter Combination vs. Sheathless Guiding Catheter for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Two Devices.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2020Article
- Radial Artery Access for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions: Contemporary Insights and Novel Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- Hand Laser Perfusion Imaging to Assess Radial Artery Patency: A Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2018Article
- Radial artery occlusion after transradial coronary catheterization.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2017Review
- Efficacy and Safety of "Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography" with Right Transradial Access versus Left Transradial Access and Femoral Access: a Retrospective Comparative Study.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The radial artery has been increasingly used for its favorable safety profile. However, no conclusive data are available on the optimal sheath size. In particular, it is seemingly difficult to weight both advantages and disadvantages of narrower versus larger sheaths size. Despite several studies were performed to compare the use of 6-Fr to the smaller 5-Fr sheaths, these were mostly small, single center-studies, yielding various results.We performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of all available studies comparing the use of 5-Fr versus 6-Fr sheaths in coronary procedures through the TRA.Studies comparing a 5-Fr versus a 6-Fr sheaths were searched for in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases.Studies were deemed eligible if they only included patients undergoing transradial cardiac catheterization with 5-Fr or 6-Fr system and reported at least one of these parameters: contrast dye volume, procedural success, procedural time, access complications, radial artery occlusion, and bleedings.Odds ratio (OR) and the mean difference (MD) were respectively used for dichotomous and continuous variables as summary measures. Both the random-effects model and the fixed effect models were used for computation of meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was assessed by means of the Cochrane Q test. Metaregression was calculated using the unrestricted maximal likelihood random effects model.The use of a 5-Fr system is associated with a significant lower contrast medium administration (MD = -22.20 [-36.43 to -7.96], P < 0.01) and significantly reduces bleedings (OR = 0.58 [0.38-0.90], P = 0.02), without compromising procedural success (OR = 0.95 [0.53-1.69], P = 0.86) or procedure length (OR = 0.55 [-2.58 to 3.69], P = 0.73), compared to the 6-Fr system. Despite no significant difference was observed between the groups (OR = 0.88 [0.50-1.56], P = 0.67), at metaregression RAO incidence in the 5-Fr group was increasingly lower as the percentage of women included into the study increased (P = 0.02).Some potentially interesting technical details, such as sheath length, hydrophilic coating, or periprocedural anticoagulation, were not homogeneously reported in individual studies.Results of the present meta-analysis confirm the excellent safety profile of transradial procedures both with 5-Fr and 6-Fr system. A 5-Fr system could be preferred in patients with a higher bleeding propensity or kidney injury.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.