Comparison of Pain Levels of Traditional Radial, Distal Radial, and Transfemoral Coronary Catheterization

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the traditional radial artery, distal radial artery, and transfemoral artery, which are vascular access sites for coronary angiography, in terms of pain level using the visual analog scale.METHODS: Between April 2021 and May 2022, consecutive patients from three centers were included in our study. A total of 540 patients, 180 from each of the traditional radial artery, distal radial artery , and transfemoral artery groups, were included. The visual analog scale was applied to the patients as soon as they were taken to bed. RESULTS: When the visual analog scale was compared between the groups, it was found to be significantly different (transfemoral artery: 2.7 & PLUSMN;1.6, traditional radial artery: 3.9 & PLUSMN;1.9, and distal radial artery: 4.9 & PLUSMN;2.1, respectively, p<0.001). When the patients were classified as mild, moderate, and severe based on the visual analog scale score, a significant difference was found between the groups in terms of body mass index, process time, access time, and number of punctures (p<0.001). Based on the receiver operating characteristic analysis, body mass index>29.8 kg/m2 predicted severe pain with 72.5% sensitivity and 73.2% specificity [(area under the curve: 0.770, 95%CI: 0.724-0.815, p<0.0001)].CONCLUSION: In our study, we found that the femoral approach caused less access site pain and a high body mass index predicts severe pain.