ArticleJournal of the Saudi Heart Association2020
Comparison between two protocols for deflation of the TR band following coronary procedures via the radial route.
Article in Journal of the Saudi Heart Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Precision percutaneous coronary intervention.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2026Review
- Preventing and Managing Radial Artery Occlusion following Transradial Procedures: Strategies and Considerations.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Effect of Radial Artery Compression with a Novel Automatic Pressure-Controlled Radial Compression Device: A Short-Term Prospective Interventional Pilot Study.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2023Article
- Outcomes of a Modified Technique for Deflation of Distal Radial Artery Occlusion Device on Radial Artery Patency After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimCoronary interventions are increasingly being performed via the radial rather than femoral route because of the lower complication rate. Compression devices such as the TR band are used to achieve hemostasis after the procedure. At present, there are no clear protocols for the deflation of the band. In this study we compared two protocols (early deflation with increased intervals vs. late deflation with smaller intervals) in terms of total time to band removal and complications, and patient and staff satisfaction.
methodsAll patients who underwent a transradial coronary procedure and had a TR band fitted were enrolled into the study. The TR band was applied using the patent hemostasis method (2 ml air pushed in after the radial pulse appears on pulse oximetry after full occlusion with 16 ml air). Patients were randomly assigned to either protocol. Protocol 1 involved removal of 2 ml of air starting 1 hour after the sheath removal and then removal of 2 ml every 30 minutes until the band came off. Protocol 2 involved removal of 4 ml of air 2 hours after the sheath removal and then further 4 ml of air every 15 minutes until the band came off. Patient and staff satisfaction was measured with a visual analogue scale.
resultsA total of 174 patients were recruited (mean age, 60 ± 11 years; 127 male, 47 female). The baseline characteristics including total heparin dose and type of procedure, in the two arms were the same. Protocol 2 (
conclusionA protocol of delayed initiation of TR band deflation followed by quick deflations is associated with a lower time to band removal with no increase in bleeding complications or patient satisfaction. However, the staff preferred longer intervals between deflations.
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.