Conventional vascular access site approach versus fully trans-wrist approach for chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: a multicenter registry

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence of vascular complication and major bleeding in patients undergoing chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a fully trans-wrist access (TWA) approach versus a conventional approach based on trans-femoral access (TFA).BACKGROUND: TFA is the preferred vascular access in CTO PCI, but it has been associated with a non-negligible risk of complications.METHODS: This retrospective registry included all patients undergoing CTO PCI at five institutions between July 2011 and October 2018. Patients were divided into two groups: Conventional (patients treated with at least one TFA) and Fully TWA (subjects exclusively treated with one or two TWA). The primary safety endpoint was a composite of vascular complications and major bleeding. The primary efficacy endpoint was procedural success.RESULTS: We included 1,900 patients (Conventional n = 1,496 and Fully TWA n = 404). Conventional patients showed higher occlusion complexity (J-CTO score 2.1 ± 1.2 vs. 1.5 ± 1.1, p < .001). Procedural success showed no significant difference between both groups (85.7 vs. 83.0%, p = .17). The primary safety endpoint occurred more frequently in the Conventional group (10.3 vs. 4.5%, p < .001), driven by vascular complications (9.4 vs. 3.7%, p < .001). On multivariate analysis, not using a Fully TWA approach was an independent predictor of the study endpoint, after adjusting for age, sex, diabetes, body mass index, chronic kidney disease, prior coronary artery bypass graft, and J-CTO score.CONCLUSIONS: Embracing a Fully TWA approach for CTO PCI might be associated with lower incidence of a composite endpoint of vascular complications and major bleeding, compared with a Conventional approach.