It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to report approach, safety, technical success, and clinical outcomes of prone trans- radial access (PTRA) and demonstrate feasibility for procedures requiring simultaneous arterial intervention and prone percutaneous access.
METHODS: Fifteen patients underwent PTRA, seven females (47%) and eight males (53%), mean age of 55 years (range, 19–78 years). All patients underwent PTRA for combined transarterial and posterior-approach percutaneous interventions. Variables included sheath size (French, F), type of anesthesia, arterial intervention technical success, posterior-approach percutaneous intervention technical success, estimated blood loss (mL), fluoroscopy and procedure time, complications, and follow-up.
RESULTS: Mean sheath size was 4 F (range, 4–6 F; SD = 0.5). Arterial interventions included transarterial embolization of renal (n=6), hepatic (n=2), and pelvic vessels (n=2), diagnostic arteriography (n=4), and embolization of an arteriovenous malformation (n=1). Posterior-approach intervention technical success was 100% (15/15). PTRA technical success was 100% (15/15). Posterior-approach percutaneous interventions included retroperitoneal (n=5) and pelvic (n=1) mass biopsies, nephrostomy tube placement (n=2), cryoablation of pelvic (n=2) and renal (n=1) masses, sclerotherapy of arteriovenous malformations (n=2), foreign body removal from the renal collecting system (n=2), ablation of a renal tumor (n=1), intracavitary injection of pulmonary mycetoma (n=1), and ablation and cementoplasty of a vertebral body tumor (n=1). The biopsies were diagnostic (6/6). There were no minor or major access-site complications.
CONCLUSION: PTRA is a safe and feasible method for performing combined arterial and posterior approach percutaneous interventions without the need for repositioning.
You may cite this article as: Srinivasa RN, Chick JFB, Gemmete JJ, et al. Prone transradial catheterization for combined single-session endovascular and percutaneous interventions: approach, technical success, safety, and outcomes in 15 patients. Diagn Interv Radiol 2018; 24:276-282.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer