التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
Transradial versus transfemoral access for treatment of HCC: a systematic review and meta analysis. |
| المؤلفون: |
Worley, L.1 (AUTHOR) Logan_Worley@URMC.Rochester.edu, Szekeres, D.1 (AUTHOR) Denes_Szekeres@URMC.Rochester.edu, Akkipeddi, S.M.1 (AUTHOR) SajalMedha_Akkipeddi@URMC.Rochester.edu, Schartz, D.2 (AUTHOR) Derrek_Schartz@URMC.Rochester.edu, Sharma, A.K.1,2 (AUTHOR) Ashwani_Sharma@URMC.Rochester.edu |
| المصدر: |
Clinical Radiology. Nov2024, Vol. 79 Issue 11, p826-832. 7p. |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
*PATIENT preferences, *CLINICAL trials, *RADIATION doses, *HEPATOCELLULAR carcinoma, *ANGIOGRAPHY |
| مستخلص: |
Hepatic angiography procedures are essential in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with traditional transfemoral arterial (TFA) access being the traditional standard. Recently, transradial arterial (TRA) access has gained popularity, offering potential benefits. This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare TRA and TFA access in hepatic angiography oncologic procedures for HCC. The study investigates fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, patient preferences, and complications associated with each access method. A systematic review was performed using PRISMA guidelines, with 11 studies encompassing 2535 HCC procedures included. Statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Continuous outcomes were calculated as mean differences, and binary outcomes were measured as odds ratios. Patient preferences, procedural complications, and access site success rates were assessed. The meta-analysis revealed that there were no significant differences in fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, or contrast dose between TRA and TFA. Access failure rates were similar for both methods. However, the odds of adverse events, excluding access failure, were significantly higher for TFA, while the overall rate of complications was comparable. Patients strongly preferred TRA over TFA due to reduced hospital stay and post-procedure discomfort. This meta-analysis supports the use of TRA for hepatic angiography oncologic procedures for HCC with patient preferences in favor of TRA. Additional randomized clinical trials are encouraged to further evaluate the feasibility and benefits of both access sites. • TFA and TRA showed no differences in most procedural outcomes. • Patients strongly favored TRA over TFA. • TFA was associated with a higher rate of adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Academic Search Index |