TCT-1231 Comparison of Micropuncture Versus Ultrasound-Guided Arterial Access Techniques: A Systematic Review of Patient Outcomes and Procedural Safety

Document Type

Abstract

Publication Date

10-28-2025

Abstract

Background: Arterial access is foundational to many endovascular procedures. Micropuncture and ultrasound-guided techniques are increasingly used to minimize complications. This study compares these two methods in terms of access success, procedural complications, and clinical outcomes. Methods: A systematic review and pooled analysis was conducted on studies comparing micropuncture and ultrasound-guided arterial access in femoral and radial procedures. Key endpoints included access success rate, access time, hematoma formation, pseudoaneurysm, and need for surgical repair. Results: Seven studies with 2,840 patients (micropuncture: n=1,420; ultrasound-guided: n=1,420) were included. Ultrasound guidance showed superior first-pass success (93.8% vs. 87.1%, p< 0.001) and reduced access site complications, especially hematomas (1.8% vs. 4.7%, p=0.02). Micropuncture offered shorter mean access time in radial access procedures. Pseudoaneurysm formation was significantly lower with ultrasound guidance (0.2% vs. 1.1%, p=0.01). Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided arterial access demonstrates a superior safety profile and higher success rate compared to micropuncture techniques, especially for femoral access. Micropuncture remains valuable for radial access and high-risk patients due to smaller initial puncture size. Categories: CORONARY: Vascular Access: Coronary

Publication Title

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volume

86

Issue

17 Supplement

First Page

B529

Last Page

B529

Comments

Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics held 2025-10-25 to 2025-10-28 in San Francisco, CA

This document is currently not available here.

Open Access

Share

COinS