Vol 28, No 6 (2021)
Original Article
Published online: 2020-07-21

open access

Page views 6966
Article views/downloads 901
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Assessment of the conventional radial artery with optical coherent tomography after the snuffbox approach

Yongcheol Kim12, Sang Yeub Lee34, Dae In Lee3, Ju-Hee Lee3, Sang Min Kim3, Jang-Whan Bae34, Kyung-Kuk Hwang34, Dong-Woon Kim34, Myeong-Chan Cho34, Myung Ho Jeong2
Pubmed: 32710794
Cardiol J 2021;28(6):849-854.


Background: This study aimed to evaluate acute injuries of the radial artery (RA) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients who underwent coronary intervention via the snuffbox approach.
Methods: Forty-six patients, who underwent coronary intervention and assessment of the conventional RA using OCT via the snuffbox approach, were enrolled from two university hospitals between August 2018 and August 2019.
Results: The mean age of the patients was 65.1 years. In this study population, 6-French (Fr) sheaths were used. The mean diameter of the conventional RA was 2.89 ± 0.33 mm, and the mean lumen area of the conventional RA was 6.68 ± 1.56 mm2. Acute injuries of the conventional RA, after the snuffbox approach, were observed in 5 (10.9%) patients. Intimal tear was observed in the RA in 1 (2.2%) case. Intraluminal thrombi, without vessel injuries, were detected in the RA in 4 (8.7%) cases. However, medial dissection was not observed in the OCT analysis.
Conclusions: This retrospective OCT-based study showed that the diameter of the conventional RA was 2.89 mm and acute vessel injury of the conventional RA was rare in patients who underwent coronary intervention via the snuffbox approach.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file


  1. Kiemeneij F, Laarman GJ. Percutaneous transradial artery approach for coronary stent implantation. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1993; 30(2): 173–178.
  2. Agostoni P, Biondi-Zoccai GGL, de Benedictis ML, et al. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44(2): 349–356.
  3. Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabró P, et al. MATRIX Investigators. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015; 385(9986): 2465–2476.
  4. Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2018; 39(2): 119–177.
  5. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40(2): 87–165.
  6. Avdikos G, Karatasakis A, Tsoumeleas A, et al. Radial artery occlusion after transradial coronary catheterization. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2017; 7(3): 305–316.
  7. Possati G, Gaudino M, Prati F, et al. Long-term results of the radial artery used for myocardial revascularization. Circulation. 2003; 108(11): 1350–1354.
  8. Kiemeneij F. Left distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography (ldTRA) and interventions (ldTRI). EuroIntervention. 2017; 13(7): 851–857.
  9. Babunashvili A, Dundua D. Recanalization and reuse of early occluded radial artery within 6 days after previous transradial diagnostic procedure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 77(4): 530–536.
  10. Kim Y, Johnson TW, Akasaka T, et al. The role of optical coherence tomography in the setting of acute myocardial infarction. J Cardiol. 2018; 72(3): 186–192.
  11. Kim Y, Hong Y, Kim S, et al. Impact of combination therapy with ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment on the neointimal response to biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent implantation in patients with acute myocardial infarction: serial assessment with optical coherence tomography. Applied Sciences. 2018; 8(10): 1968.
  12. Yonetsu T, Kakuta T, Lee T, et al. Assessment of acute injuries and chronic intimal thickening of the radial artery after transradial coronary intervention by optical coherence tomography. Eur Heart J. 2010; 31(13): 1608–1615.
  13. Kim Y, Jeong MHo, Kim MC, et al. Feasibility of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention via left snuffbox approach. Korean Circ J. 2018; 48(12): 1120–1130.
  14. Kume T, Akasaka T, Kawamoto T, et al. Assessment of coronary arterial thrombus by optical coherence tomography. Am J Cardiol. 2006; 97(12): 1713–1717.
  15. Lee JW, Park SW, Son JW, et al. Real-world experience of the left distal transradial approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: a prospective observational study (LeDRA). EuroIntervention. 2018; 14(9): e995–e99e1003.
  16. Mizuguchi Y, Izumikawa T, Hashimoto S, et al. Efficacy and safety of the distal transradial approach in coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: a Japanese multicenter experience. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2020; 35(2): 162–167.
  17. Norimatsu K, Kusumoto T, Yoshimoto K, et al. Importance of measurement of the diameter of the distal radial artery in a distal radial approach from the anatomical snuffbox before coronary catheterization. Heart Vessels. 2019; 34(10): 1615–1620.
  18. Kubo T, Akasaka T, Shite J, et al. OCT compared with IVUS in a coronary lesion assessment: the OPUS-CLASS study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 6(10): 1095–1104.
  19. Gutiérrez-Chico JL, Serruys PW, Girasis C, et al. Quantitative multi-modality imaging analysis of a fully bioresorbable stent: a head-to-head comparison between QCA, IVUS and OCT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 28(3): 467–478.
  20. Kim Y, Jeong MHo, Kim MC, et al. Assessment for ambiguous angiographic finding in patient with acute myocardial infarction by optical coherence tomography. Cardiol J. 2018; 25(4): 536–537.
  21. Kim Y, Johnson TW, Park SH, et al. Optical coherence tomography findings of non-st elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease. Korean Circ J. 2020; 50(1): 88–90.