A novel technique for simultaneous hemostasis of ipsilateral radial and ulnar artery access sites

Roberts, Jonathan; Niu, Jianli

doi:10.1002/ccd.27351

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hemostasis in these cases is also of utmost importance. Newly published studies have proposed the usage of different types of dual hemostasis methods for the punctured radial and ulnar arteries 18,19 . In the last 10 years, we have been using two types of hemostasis shown in these patients, but dedicated bands for dual hemostasis are worth exploring.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to published observational and randomized studies, transulnar arterial approach (TUA) for diagnostic procedures and percutaneous coronary interventions is a safe and successful alternative to TRA, even in cases with ipsilateral radial artery occlusion (RAO) 11 and has most of the useful benefits of TRA as a wrist approach 11‐16 . However, rare studies have ventured into evaluating the safety of simultaneous use of the radial and ulnar arteries with two sheaths placed in the same arm 17‐19 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[11][12][13][14][15][16] However, rare studies have ventured into evaluating the safety of simultaneous use of the radial and ulnar arteries with two sheaths placed in the same arm. [17][18][19] In this study, we aimed to examine the safety of transulnar access after failure to cross through ipsilateral radial access (TRA), with two sheaths placed in same arm (RA and UA). We conducted long-term follow-up of all patients clinically and with duplex ultrasound.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ipsilateral transulnar artery approach catheterizations after failure of the radial approach—Are two sheaths in the same arm safe?

Zafirovska

Jovkovski

Vasilev

et al. 2021

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To assess the safety and feasibility of ipsilateral transulnar access (TUA) after failure of radial access (TRA), with two sheaths placed in the radial and ulnar arteries (RA and UA) in the same arm.Materials and Methods: All consecutive patients with TUA due to inability to cross from ipsilateral TRA in the period from March 2011 until September 2020 were included in the study. We examined clinical and procedure characteristics, access site bleeding and ischemic complications and failure mode of initial TRA. Patients were assessed by duplex ultrasound post-procedure (at an average of 56 ± 31 months) and followed clinically (functional and pain assessment).Results: In this period, out of 51,866 patients 112 (0.2%) had a transulnar artery approach due to inability to cross from ipsilateral radial approach. Mean age of patients was 65 ± 11 years with 44% females. Cause for crossover to ipsilateral TUA was inability to cross a RA anomaly in 107 (95%) patients, mostly due to the presence of a "360 " RA loop in 88 patients.Type 3 and 4 EASY Score hematoma was present in 3 patients (2.6%). Six (5.3%) of the patients had new ipsilateral radial artery occlusion noted on duplex on follow up. There were no ulnar artery occlusions detected. There were no clinical or ischemic hand complications seen during a median 4.3 years of follow up. Conclusion:Ipsilateral transulnar artery access following failed radial artery access crossing is safe and successful for coronary angiography and intervention with low rates of complications.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ipsilateral transulnar artery approach catheterizations after failure of the radial approach—Are two sheaths in the same arm safe?

Zafirovska

Jovkovski

Vasilev

et al. 2021

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Hemorrhage Control

Allison¹

2019

Critical Care Nursing Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncontrolled blood loss is a major cause of preventable death worldwide. A severe injury can occur anywhere at any time. Controlling blood loss is an important issue for patient care in the hospital setting. Through the casualties of war, the lifesaving value of quick interventions was developed. Since 2001, new hemostatic agents have advanced the benefits of controlling blood loss. There are unforgettable lessons learned in the preventable deaths of many soldiers and should be passed on to the next generation of health care providers, to include all hospitals up to level I trauma hospitals. This article covers the current hemostatic agents that have been used for more than 17 years on the battlefield and are slowly making their way into the hospital settings. The hemostatic agents covered include QuikClot Combat Gauze, QuikClot Control+, WoundClot Hemostatic Gauze, HemCon Nasal Plug, and RevMedx's XSTAT hemostatic device. The standard of care should not be affected by the location of a patient, whether that patient is in a remote village overseas, on the battlefield, a rural farm, or at a major metropolitan hospital here in the United States.

show abstract

A novel technique for simultaneous hemostasis of ipsilateral radial and ulnar artery access sites

Cited by 2 publications

References 16 publications

Ipsilateral transulnar artery approach catheterizations after failure of the radial approach—Are two sheaths in the same arm safe?

Ipsilateral transulnar artery approach catheterizations after failure of the radial approach—Are two sheaths in the same arm safe?

Hemorrhage Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About