Status and phase
Conditions
Treatments
About
The aim of this study is to compare the radial and femoral access for percutaneous interventions in the acute phase of the ST elevation acute myocardial infarction in terms of efficacy and security.
Full description
Some groups have previously used the radial artery as the access route in the procedures of percutaneous coronary revascularization, with good results. The advantages of the radial compared with femoral access are related to a lower incidence of vascular complications. The radial access has also inconveniences such as a less predictable anatomy which can make the procedure difficult and prolong the time required.The patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction have an increased risk of vascular complications after interventional procedures because previous antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy.On the other hand, the time and success of the procedure are significant prognostic issues.In this sitting, the radial approach might reduce vascular complications and increase other cardiovascular events when comparing with the classical femoral access. For this reason, the purpose of the study is to compare both arterial access in terms of efficacy and security and to quantify the consequences of the advantages and drawbacks of both.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal