Comparison of acute kidney injury with radial vs. femoral access for patients undergoing coronary catheterization: An updated meta‑analysis of 46,816 patients
- Chang Wang
- Weiwei Chen
- Ming Yu
- Ping Yang
Affiliations: Department of Cardiology, China‑Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Jilin Provincial Precision Medicine Key Laboratory for Cardiovascular Genetic Diagnosis, Jilin Provincial Engineering Laboratory for Endothelial Function and Genetic Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Disease, Jilin Provincial Molecular Biology Research Center for Precision Medicine of Major Cardiovascular Disease, Jilin Provincial Cardiovascular Research Institute, Changchun, Jilin 130028, P.R. China
- Published online on: September 2, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9170
Copyright: © Wang
et al. This is an open access article distributed under the
terms of Creative
Commons Attribution License.
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Trans‑radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention or angiography has gained popularity amongst interventional cardiologists. Radial access is also thought to reduce the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in the immediate post‑operative period. The purpose of the present study was to perform a comprehensive updated systematic review and meta‑analysis comparing the incidence of AKI following the radial vs. femoral route of coronary catheterization. An electronic literature search of the PubMed, BioMed Central, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar databases up to 1st January 2020 was performed. A total of 14 studies were included, 2 of which were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 6 studies utilized propensity score matching. Comparison of the data of 21,479 patients in the radial group and 25,337 patients in the femoral group indicated a reduced incidence of AKI with the radial route [odds ratio (OR):0.66, 95% CI: 0.54-0.81, P<0.0001, I2=74%]. Similar results were obtained with sub‑group analyses for RCTs (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.77‑0.98, P=0.02, I2=0%), retrospective studies (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36‑0.90, P=0.02, I2=86%) and propensity score‑matched studies (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.48‑0.83, P=0.0009, I2=45%). Multivariable‑adjusted ORs of AKI for the radial vs. femoral route were extracted from non‑RCTs and pooled for a meta‑analysis, which also demonstrated similar results (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.57‑0.88, P=0.002, I2=70%). Within the limitations of the study, the present results indicate that, as compared to femoral access, the use of trans‑radial access for coronary catheterization is associated with a significantly reduced incidence of AKI. A reduction of AKI by ~34% may be expected with the use of radial access.