Transradial versus transfemoral intervention in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the Korean transradial intervention registry of 1 285 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Although the implementation of transradial intervention (TRI) has increased over the last few years, there are limited data on the impact of TRI on efficacy and safety in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). We sought to compare one-year clinical outcomes and bleeding complications of TRI with those of transfemoral intervention (TFI) in patients with NSTE-ACS.

METHODS: The Korean TRI registry was a cohort of 20 centres from 2012 to 2015. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death (CD), non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) and repeat revascularisation (RR). Among the 1 319 patients with NSTE-ACS, 1 285 were finally analysed after excluding 34 due to lack of follow-up data. The patients were divided into TRI and TFI groups according to the final access site.

RESULTS: At one-year follow up, the TRI group showed a significantly lower rate of MACE, and a marginally significantly lower rate of CD than the TFI group in the crude population. However, in propensity-score matched analysis, the rate of MACE did not differ between the TRI and TFI groups. Regarding bleeding complications, the TRI group was associated with significantly lower rates of major bleeding in both the crude and matched populations. Independent predictors of MACE were chronic kidney disease (CKD) and multi-vessel disease (MVD).

CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NSTE-ACS, TRI was associated with favourable one-year clinical outcomes and lower bleeding complications compared to TFI. Independent predictors of MACE were clinical and angiographic profiles (CKD, MVD) rather than vascular access sites.