Coronary angiography safety between radial and femoral access
One of the major criticisms of the radial approach is that it takes longer overall procedure and fluoroscopy time, which means not only more staff will be exposed during the procedures, but they will also stand close to the patient where rates of radiation scattered by the patient are higher. The ai...
Main Authors: | Osama Tayeh, Federica Ettori |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
SpringerOpen
2014-06-01
|
Series: | The Egyptian Heart Journal |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110260813000793 |
Similar Items
-
Door-to-balloon time in radial versus femoral approach for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
by: Osama Tayeh, et al.
Published: (2014-06-01) -
Comparison between femoral access versus radial access in primary percutaneous coronary interventions
by: Ahmed K A. G. Hassan
Published: (2021-01-01) -
Comparative Study of the Radial and Femoral Artery Approaches for Diagnostic Coronary Angiography
by: Mansour Sallam, et al.
Published: (2009-12-01) -
Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
by: Gani Bajraktari, et al.
Published: (2021-05-01) -
Is trans-radial approach related to an increased risk of radiation exposure in patients who underwent diagnostic coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention? (The SAKARYA study)
by: Çağın Mustafa Üreyen, et al.
Published: (2019-06-01)