Background : Percutaneous coronary intervention is now the best way of management\nof acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Contrast induced nephropathy is a\nserious complication and greatly dependent on several factors. It is still unclear\nwhether the vascular access migrates CIN risk. Objective : To study the impact\nof Radial Access (RA) compared with Femoral Access (FA) on developing contrast-\ninduced nephropathy (CIN) in patients undergoing invasive management\nof acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods : Sixty patients eligible for invasive\nmanagement of ACS at cardiology department (Menoufia University hospital\nand National Heart Institute) were randomized into two groups. Group I: included\n30 patients with femoral approach and Group II: included 30 patients\nwith radial approach. The occurrence of CIN estimated by KDIGO definition\n(absolute increase in serum creatinine (SCr) by greater than and equal to0.5 mg/dl within 48 hours; or\nincrease in SCr to greater than and equal to25% of baseline) was estimated in both groups. Results : Only\n9 patients (15%) developed CIN, 5 patients (55.6%) of them underwent PCI\nthrough FA without statistically significant difference between the two approaches.\nConclusion: CIN is considered a potential complication of percutaneous \ncoronary intervention (PCI). Our study did not show the preference of\nusing an approach over the other.
Loading....