Trial reportBMC medicine2024
Comparison of long-term radial artery occlusion via distal vs. conventional transradial access (CONDITION): a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 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 Long-term Radial Artery Occlusion in Coronary Diagnosis and Intervention Via Distal vs Conventional Radial Approach: Randomized-controlled Trial(CONDITION)
COmparison of the HaNd DysFunction in Coronary Diagnosis and INtervention Via Distal vs Conventional Radial AccEss: Randomized Controlled Trial (CONFINE)
Safety and Efficacy of 6-French Glidesheath Slender in Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Via Distal Transradial Access in Patients With Small Vessels: A Single-Center, Adaptive, Randomized Controlled Study
UltraSound Guided Distal Radial Artery vS Conventional Transradial Access for Interventional Coronary Angiography
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 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
- Efficacy and safety of distal transradial access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Comparing Two Distal Radial Hemostatic Devices for Radial Artery Patency Post-TACE: A Randomized Trial.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Trial
- Distal access and procedural anticoagulation to prevent radial artery occlusion after coronary angiography - the randomised RAPID trial.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Trial
- Distal radial access to prevent radial artery occlusion for STEMI patients (RAPID III): a randomized controlled trial.BMC medicine · 2025Trial
- Article
- Distal versus proximal transradial access and radial artery occlusion: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Review
- Optimizing distal radial access: clinical and anatomical predictors of failure from the multicenter DISTAL registry.Coronary artery disease · 2026Article
- Distal radial access for complex percutaneous coronary interventions: current evidence and future perspectives.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Learning curve of distal transradial access for coronary intervention: a single-center retrospective study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Anatomical Snuffbox Versus Dorsum of the Hand for Optimal Access Site in Distal Radial Access: Insight From the KODRA Registry.Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- The efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention via distal transradial access in the treatment of coronary heart disease patients.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Feasibility and safety of the distal radial access for vascular access interventional therapy.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Comparison of distal and conventional transradial access on procedure duration and radiation exposure in carotid artery stenting.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- "Distal radial first": feasibility and safety for coronary angiography and PCI in Australia.AsiaIntervention · 2025Article
- Feasibility and Safety of Distal Radial Artery Access with Recanalization of a Chronic Radial Artery Occlusion for Subsequent Coronary Angiography and Intervention.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2025Article
- A Personal Commentary Regarding Radial and Femoral Arterial Access.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe distal transradial access (dTRA) has become an attractive and alternative access to the conventional transradial access (TRA) for cardiovascular interventional diagnosis and/or treatment. There was a lack of randomized clinical trials to evaluate the effect of the dTRA on the long-term radial artery occlusion (RAO).
methodsThis was a prospective, randomized controlled study. The primary endpoint was the incidence of long-term RAO at 3 months after discharge. The secondary endpoints included the successful puncture rate, puncture time, and other access-related complications.
resultsThe incidence of long-term RAO was 0.8% (3/361) for dTRA and 3.3% (12/365) for TRA (risk ratio = 0.25, 95% confidence interval = 0.07-0.88, P = 0.02). The incidence of RAO at 24 h was significantly lower in the dTRA group than in the TRA group (2.5% vs. 6.7%, P < 0.01). The puncture success rate (96.0% vs. 98.5%, P = 0.03) and single puncture attempt (70.9% vs. 83.9%, P < 0.01) were significantly lower in the dTRA group than in the TRA group. However, the number of puncture attempts and puncture time were higher in the dTRA group. The dTRA group had a lower incidence of bleeding than the TRA group (1.5% vs. 6.0%, P < 0.01). There was no difference in the success rate of the procedure, total fluoroscopy time, or incidence of other access-related complications between the two groups. In the per-protocol analysis, the incidence of mEASY type ≥ II haematoma was significantly lower in the dTRA group, which was consistent with that in the as-treated analysis.
conclusionsThe dTRA significantly reduced the incidence of long-term RAO, bleeding or haematoma.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifer: NCT05253820.
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.