ArticleCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2023
Impact of radial compression protocols on radial artery occlusion and hemostasis time in coronary angiography.
Article in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multivariate analysis and individualized nomogram construction for predicting radial artery occlusion risk after transradial intervention.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Advances in Technology and Technique in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Clinical Review.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Review
- Article
- Validation of High Ischemic and Bleeding Risk Criteria of European Guidelines in Peripheral Arterial Disease.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
- Transradial intervention in dialysis patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a Japanese nationwide registry study.European heart journal open · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protocols for hemostasis after trans-radial approach (TRA) vary depending on the institute as there is no established evidence-based protocol. This study aimed to investigate the clinical implications of radial compression protocols. Consecutive patients who underwent outpatient invasive catheter angiography before and after April 2018 were treated with traditional and new protocols, respectively. Using the same hemostasis band, in the conventional protocol, fixed amount of air was removed soon after the procedure, 2 h later, and 3 h later, whereas the air was removed as much as possible every 30 min in the new protocol. A total of 1842 patients (71 ± 10 years old, 77% male) were included. Compared with the traditional protocol group (n = 1001), the new protocol group (n = 841) had a significantly lower rate of dual antiplatelet therapy (35% and 24% in the traditional and new groups, respectively, p < 0.001). The time required for complete hemostasis was approximately one-third with the new protocol (190 ± 16 and 66 ± 32 min, p < 0.001) with no clinically relevant bleeding. The incidence of radial artery occlusion (RAO) was 9.8% and 0.9% in the traditional and new protocol groups, respectively (p < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, the new protocol was associated with a reduced risk of RAO (odds ratio 0.10, p < 0.001) and a shorter hemostasis time (odds ratio 0.01, p < 0.001). The new protocol for hemostasis after TRA was strongly associated with a shorter hemostasis time and a lower rate of RAO.
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.