ArticleCureus2023
Comparison Between Distal Trans-radial Access and Conventional Trans-radial Access for Coronary Angiography.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06986889 (COmparison of the HaNd DysFunction in Coronary Diagnosis and INtervention Via Distal vs Conventional Radial AccEss), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
COmparison of the HaNd DysFunction in Coronary Diagnosis and INtervention Via Distal vs Conventional Radial AccEss: Randomized Controlled Trial (CONFINE)
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hand Dysfunction After Intervention via Distal Versus Conventional Transradial Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.Clinical cardiology · 2026Pooled it
- Distal versus proximal radial access in coronary angiography: a meta-analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Distal Radial Artery Access versus Proximal Radial Artery Access for Cardiac Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2025Pooled it
- Distal versus proximal transradial access and radial artery occlusion: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Review
- Efficacy of uterine artery embolization through a distal radial artery approach for treatment of uterine fibroids.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Investigating optimal compression approach following radial artery puncture: a retrospective study.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Compared with a conventional wrist puncture for radial artery catheterization, a distal radial artery puncture has the advantage of reducing the incidence of radial artery occlusion (RAO). Aim The present study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of distal trans-radial access compared with conventional trans-radial access for coronary angiography. Methods A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care center in India between December 2018 and November 2020. A total of 420 patients (aged >18 years) with signs and symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD) and with a palpable radial artery in anatomical snuffbox were randomized into two groups. Group A comprised patients accessed at the distal trans-radial site, and Group B consisted of patients accessed at the conventional trans-radial site for coronary angiography. Baseline demographics, clinical history, and risk factors for CAD were documented. Procedural-related parameters and complications were compared between the two groups. Results The procedural success rate was non-significant between Group A and Group B (96% vs. 98%; p=0.38). Puncture in a single attempt was higher in Group B compared to Group A (92% vs. 78%; p<0.001). There was no significant difference between Group A and Group B for operation time (p=0.207), fluoroscopy time (p=0.183), and contrast volume (p=0.345). The rate of RAO was higher in Group B compared to Group A (13% vs. 2%; p<0.001). Radial artery hematoma/swelling at the puncture site between Group A (10%) and Group B (8%) was not significant (p=0.61). Post-procedural hemostasis time in Group A was 28 ± 7.86 minutes, and in Group B was 24 ± 6.23 minutes. Both post-procedural persistence of pain (p<0.001) and hand clumsiness (p<0.001) were significantly higher in Group B compared to Group A. Conclusion For coronary angiography, the distal trans-radial access site is a reliable and secure alternate access site.
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.