BACKGROUND: There are few studies on quality of life and costs after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using different vascular accesses. We have compared procedure-related discomforts and costs of PCI using the radial or femoral approaches during hospital stay. METHODS: Prospective, single center registry, including patients undergoing elective PCI. Procedure related complaints were assessed at the end of bed rest using a specific questionnaire. Costs per unit of all the materials used in PCI were taken into account. RESULTS: Patients treated by the radial approach were younger, male, and stable angina was the most common clinical presentation in both groups. Procedural duration, number of vessels treated and stents per patient were similar in both groups. There were no major vascular complications after PCI. We observed greater overall discomfort associated with the procedure (60.3% vs. 81.0%; P = 0.01), back pain (1.7% vs. 17.2%; P < 0.01), difficult urination (1.7% vs. 12.1%; P = 0.03) and patient's dependence to carry on basic activities (70.7% vs. 98.3%; P < 0.01) during the post-procedural observation period in the femoral group. No significant differences were observed between groups when costs were compared, with or without taking into account stent-related costs. CONCLUSIONS: PCI using the radial approach demonstrated to provide greater comfort for patients when compared to the femoral approach during hospitalization. Costs of the procedure using the two accesses were similar.
Percutaneous coronary intervention; Radial artery; Femoral artery; Quality of life
