Scholars@Duke publication: A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial.

A registry-based randomized trial comparing radial and femoral approaches in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women) trial.

Publication , Journal Article

Rao, SV; Hess, CN; Barham, B; Aberle, LH; Anstrom, KJ; Patel, TB; Jorgensen, JP; Mazzaferri, EL; Jolly, SS; Jacobs, A; Newby, LK; Gibson, CM ...

Published in: JACC Cardiovasc Interv

August 2014

Published version (DOI) Link to item

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the effect of radial access on outcomes in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using a registry-based randomized trial. BACKGROUND: Women are at increased risk of bleeding and vascular complications after PCI. The role of radial access in women is unclear. METHODS: Women undergoing cardiac catheterization or PCI were randomized to radial or femoral arterial access. Data from the CathPCI Registry and trial-specific data were merged into a final study database. The primary efficacy endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding or vascular complications requiring intervention. The primary feasibility endpoint was access site crossover. The primary analysis cohort was the subgroup undergoing PCI; sensitivity analyses were conducted in the total randomized population. RESULTS: The trial was stopped early for a lower than expected event rate. A total of 1,787 women (691 undergoing PCI) were randomized at 60 sites. There was no significant difference in the primary efficacy endpoint between radial or femoral access among women undergoing PCI (radial 1.2% vs. 2.9% femoral, odds ratio [OR]: 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12 to 1.27); among women undergoing cardiac catheterization or PCI, radial access significantly reduced bleeding and vascular complications (0.6% vs. 1.7%; OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.90). Access site crossover was significantly higher among women assigned to radial access (PCI cohort: 6.1% vs. 1.7%; OR: 3.65; 95% CI: 1.45 to 9.17); total randomized cohort: (6.7% vs. 1.9%; OR: 3.70; 95% CI: 2.14 to 6.40). More women preferred radial access. CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic trial, which was terminated early, the radial approach did not significantly reduce bleeding or vascular complications in women undergoing PCI. Access site crossover occurred more often in women assigned to radial access. (SAFE-PCI for Women; NCT01406236).