此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

UltraSound Guided Distal Radial Artery vS Conventional Transradial Access for Interventional Coronary Angiography (US-DRASTIC)

2026年5月24日 更新者:Grigorios Tsigkas、University Hospital of Patras
Comparative study of ultrasound-guided distal radial access versus conventional radial access regarding the incidence of vascular access crossover.

研究概览

详细说明

Current European and American guidelines issued by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) recommend transradial access (TRA) as the preferred access route for cardiac catheterization in both acute and chronic coronary syndromes, as well as in complex coronary interventions. Compared with transfemoral access, transradial access has demonstrated significant benefits regarding vascular complications, major bleeding, mortality, and earlier mobilization and discharge of patients.

In recent years, access through the distal segment of the radial artery in the anatomical snuffbox has emerged as a technique with highly beneficial characteristics comparable to conventional radial access, while also offering additional advantages. The ANGIE study demonstrated that distal radial access was associated with a statistically significant reduction in radial artery occlusion compared with conventional radial puncture. Puncture of the distal radial artery preserves antegrade blood flow in the forearm during hemostatic compression, thereby reducing the risk of arterial occlusion.

Existing literature Although the benefit of distal radial access in preventing radial artery occlusion has now been established, the same does not apply to crossover incidence, namely the need to change to an alternative vascular access site because the intervention cannot be completed through the initially selected access.

Several studies have shown higher crossover rates with distal radial access compared with conventional radial access. In the study by Koutouzis et al., distal radial access failed more often, with a crossover incidence of 30% versus 2% in the conventional radial group. Similar findings were reported in the DAPRAO study, the ANGIE trial, the DISCO RADIAL trial, the CONDITION trial, and observational studies and meta-analyses. Overall, published evidence consistently suggests that distal radial access is associated with a higher likelihood of crossover than conventional radial access when performed without ultrasound guidance.

Aim and originality of the study A common characteristic of all the above studies is that the comparison between the two access techniques was performed using anatomical guidance rather than ultrasound guidance.

As noted in the SCAI recommendations, failure to catheterize the radial artery is the leading cause of transradial procedural failure. The radial artery is relatively small in diameter, may be calcified, or may present anatomical variations that complicate vascular access. Two-dimensional ultrasound may therefore be a valuable tool for pre-procedural planning and real-time guidance.

A large meta-analysis of 12 studies including 2,432 adults undergoing conventional transradial access under ultrasound guidance showed improved first-pass success rates and reduced access failure rates. Similarly, ultrasound-guided distal radial access significantly increased successful intervention rates in the study by Mori et al. Consequently, the purpose of the present study is to demonstrate ultrasound guidance as a technique capable of increasing successful completion rates for both vascular approaches, while establishing distal radial access as a non-inferior alternative to conventional radial access regarding crossover probability.

Methodology The study will be conducted after approval by the Scientific Council and the Ethics and Deontology Committee of the University General Hospital of Patras.

This is a prospective, randomized, single-center, non-inferiority clinical study that will be carried out in the Hemodynamic Laboratory of the Cardiology Department of the University General Hospital of Patras in collaboration with the Radiology Department.

Study population The control group will undergo coronary angiography through conventional transradial access (TRA). The intervention group will undergo coronary angiography through distal radial access (DRA). Radial artery puncture will be performed exclusively under ultrasound guidance. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to DRA or TRA.

Arterial access procedure:

The procedure begins with sterilization of both potential puncture sites regardless of randomization group. Conventional radial artery puncture is performed approximately 2-3 cm proximal to the styloid process. In patients randomized to distal transradial access (dTRA), puncture is performed more distally in the anatomical snuffbox at an angle of 30-80 degrees.

The interventional cardiologist uses the ultrasound probe exclusively, covered with a sterile protective sheath, to identify anatomical landmarks, define a safe puncture site, and avoid injury to adjacent structures. Local lidocaine infiltration is then performed under ultrasound guidance. The intravascular position of the needle is confirmed by ultrasound visualization and continuous blood flow.

After successful puncture of the radial artery, a 6 French sheath is inserted using the Seldinger technique. Subsequently, 50 IU/kg unfractionated heparin is administered (100 IU/kg total dose in case of angioplasty), together with nitroglycerin according to standard practice.

Hemostasis procedure After completion of the procedure, a TR band device is used. Hemostasis is assessed at 0,5 ,1, 2, and 3 hours after placement of the device, and if hemostasis is not achieved within this timeframe, manual compression is applied.

Data collection

For all participants, the following will be recorded:

  • Demographic characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, medical history, and chronic medication
  • Body weight and body mass index (BMI)
  • Reason for catheterization (STEMI, NSTEMI, unstable angina, stable coronary artery disease, suspected coronary artery disease, or valvular disease)
  • Periprocedural antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy
  • Laboratory tests: Ht, Hgb, PLT, WBC, Urea, Creatinine
  • Allen test and quality of radial artery pulse
  • Total puncture attempts and total time to achieve vascular access
  • Fluoroscopy duration, total angiography time, and contrast volume
  • Number and type of diagnostic catheters used
  • Type of hemostatic device and duration of hemostasis Primary endpoint Need for vascular access crossover due to failed puncture, failed wire or sheath advancement, or inability to complete the procedure through the initial vascular access. The exact reason for crossover will be recorded.

Secondary endpoints

  • Local hematoma classified according to EASY criteria
  • Arterial spasm severity
  • Sheath placement time
  • Total procedural time
  • Time from puncture initiation until completion of coronary angiography before PCI
  • Time required for diagnostic coronary angiography after sheath placement
  • Time required until PCI completion
  • Total fluoroscopy time
  • Total DAP
  • Air Kerma
  • Hemostasis duration
  • Vascular complications (arterial perforation, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula)
  • Distal radial artery occlusion before discharge
  • Bleeding events according to BARC classification

研究类型

介入性

注册 (估计的)

1400

阶段

  • 不适用

联系人和位置

本节提供了进行研究的人员的详细联系信息,以及有关进行该研究的地点的信息。

学习联系方式

  • 姓名:Athinagoras Theofilatos
  • 电话号码:+30 6946747300
  • 邮箱:athinag@gmail.com

研究联系人备份

  • 姓名:Grigorios Tsigas, assistant professor
  • 电话号码:+30 6974466662

学习地点

      • Pátrai、希腊
        • 招聘中
        • University Hospital of Patras
        • 接触:

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

  • 成人
  • 年长者

接受健康志愿者

不

描述

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Indication for Invasive coronary angiography

Exclusion Criteria:

  • STEMI
  • Renal replacement therapy patients
  • Serious dermal or bone deformity of the radiocarpal joint
  • Shock

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 主要用途:其他
  • 分配:随机化
  • 介入模型:并行分配
  • 屏蔽:双倍的

武器和干预

参与者组/臂
干预/治疗
有源比较器:ultrasound guided distal radial artery
ultrasound guided distal radial artery acess for coronary angiography
Diagnostic and if indicated percutaneus coronary intervention during coronary angiography
其他名称:
  • pci
有源比较器:ultrasound guided conventional transradial acess
ultrasound guided conventional transradial acess for coronary angiography
Diagnostic and if indicated percutaneus coronary intervention during coronary angiography
其他名称:
  • pci

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
crossover
大体时间:Periprocedural.Up to 5 mins will be allowed before giving up on designated method to obtain access
Need for a different access to begin the procedure other than the one specified in the patient's arm
Periprocedural.Up to 5 mins will be allowed before giving up on designated method to obtain access

次要结果测量

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Arterial vasospasm
大体时间:periprocedural
periprocedural
hemostasis
大体时间:Will be checked at set intervals of 30-60-90-180 mins post procedure
Time from procedure's end until removal of hemostatic device
Will be checked at set intervals of 30-60-90-180 mins post procedure
Time until pci
大体时间:periprocedural
Time from first needle puncture until pci (percutaneous coronary intervention) has been completed (If needed)
periprocedural
radial artery occlusion
大体时间:30 days post procedure
ultrasound evaluation of radial artery patency after end of hemostasis
30 days post procedure
hematoma
大体时间:pre discharge , post procedure
using EASY classification
pre discharge , post procedure
Time required for sheath insertion
大体时间:periprocedural
Time required from first puncture until sheath is sucessfully introduced into the artery
periprocedural
Total procedure time
大体时间:periprocedural
Time from first needle puncture until procedure end (hemostatic device placement signals the end )
periprocedural
Coronary angiography time
大体时间:periprocedural
Time from first needle puncture until all 3 coronary arteries have been sufficiently depicted
periprocedural

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

出版物和有用的链接

负责输入研究信息的人员自愿提供这些出版物。这些可能与研究有关。

一般刊物

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始 (实际的)

2026年5月12日

初级完成 (估计的)

2028年5月12日

研究完成 (估计的)

2028年11月1日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2026年5月12日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2026年5月24日

首次发布 (实际的)

2026年6月1日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (实际的)

2026年6月1日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2026年5月24日

最后验证

2026年5月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)

计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?

未定

IPD 计划说明

We plan to share data with other researchers only if they're formally requested and cited afterwards

药物和器械信息、研究文件

研究美国 FDA 监管的药品

不

研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品

不

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅