ArticleJACC. Advances2025
Impact of Anthropometric Measures on Distal vs Conventional Radial Access for Percutaneous Coronary Procedures.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distal radial access for complex percutaneous coronary interventions: current evidence and future perspectives.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Distal radial access in interventional cardiology: technique, pitfalls and recommendations.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Results from the Distal vs Conventional Radial Access (DISCO RADIAL) trial confirmed distal radial access (DRA) as a valid alternative to conventional transradial access, with equally low rates of radial artery occlusion (RAO), yet higher crossovers but shorter hemostasis. Objectives: The purpose of the study was to investigate whether patient anthropometric measures influence the effect of randomized access on key secondary outcomes. Methods: DISCO RADIAL was an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in which patients with indications for percutaneous coronary procedure using a 6-F Slender sheath were randomized to DRA (n = 650) or transradial access (n = 657) implementing best practices to reduce RAO. The primary endpoint of the trial was incidence of forearm RAO, which was extremely uncommon. Secondary endpoints, including sheath insertion time, radial artery spasm, crossover (failure to obtain access through assigned access site), hemostasis time, and access site complications, were the focus of the current analysis. Regression models (linear for continuous and logistic for binary outcomes) were used to determine whether anthropometric measures (weight, height, body mass index, and body surface area) influenced the effect of randomized access on outcomes. Results: Across tertiles of weight, height, body mass index, and body surface area, both before and after adjustment for sex and age, the main effect of vascular access on radial artery spasm, crossover, hemostasis time, and access site complications remained, with no significant interaction effect. Conclusions: The results of this exploratory analysis are consistent with the main findings of the trial and support the use of DRA in all patients, regardless of anthropometric measures.
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.