BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the most appropriate reperfusion strategy in acute myocardial infarction. PCI by the radial approach in stable coronary syndromes is an effective alternative when compared to the femoral approach, with reduced risk of bleeding and vascular complications. This paper is aimed at evaluating the safety and efficacy of PCI in acute myocardial infarction by the radial approach in a series of consecutive patients. METHOD: From January 97 to July 2009, 387 patients were treated by PCI within 12 hours of acute myocardial infarction. Patients with cardiogenic shock and those undergoing balloon angioplasty or saphenous vein graft PCI were excluded. One hundred and thirty-two PCI by radial approach (34.8%) and 247 by femoral approach (65.2%) were carried out. RESULTS: High angiographic success (95.6% vs. 96.8%; P = 0.57) was observed with the same rate of post-procedure myocardial perfusion, regardless of the approach used. After 30 days, there was a trend towards lower incidence of events in the radial approach group (1.5% vs. 6.9%; P = 0.07), possibly due to the lower occurrence of stent thrombosis in this group (0.8% vs. 4.9%; P= 0.04) and less need of target vessel revascularization (0.8% vs. 4.9%; P = 0.04). There was no difference in the incidence of major bleeding between the two groups (2.3% vs. 2%; P > 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that the radial approach in primary angioplasty is safe and effective when performed by interventional "radialists" in eligible patients, and is an attractive alternative to the femoral approach, especially in patients at high risk of vascular complications such as obese patients and those receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors or thrombolytics.
Myocardial infarction; Stents; Coronary angiography; Radial artery; Femoral artery; Angioplasty, transluminal, percutaneous coronary; Treatment outcome
