La radiologia medica

, Volume 123, Issue 11, pp 885–889 | Cite as

Early post-procedural patients compliance and VAS after UAE through transradial versus transfemoral approach: preliminary results

  • Antonio Basile
  • Alberto Rebonato
  • Giovanni Failla
  • Giuseppe Caltabiano
  • Andrea BoncoraglioEmail author
  • Cecilia Gozzo
  • Alessandro Motta
  • Pietro Valerio Foti
  • Stefano Palmucci
  • Alfonso Juanjo García
  • Josè Garcia-Medina



The aim of our study is to verify VAS and patient compliance in the immediate post-procedural time, in patients undergoing UAE through radial approach versus femoral procedure.


Between January and September 2017, 30 consecutive patients (age range 28–47, average 32 years) were enrolled for the study. UAE was performed by two interventional radiologists with more than 10 years of experience and more than 100 cases of UAE done. Patients were divided into two groups: transfemoral approach (group a, n = 15 patients) and transradial approach (group b, n = 15 patients). After procedure, patients were questioned about the compliance using the questionnaire at 24 h and VAS rating at 6, 12, 18 and 24 h.


The average of VAS in group b was lower than in group a in each evaluation at 6 h (p < 0.20), 12 h (p < 0.07), 18 h (p < 0.02) and 24 h (p < 0.22) on the basis of Mann–Whitney U test, however, without a clear scientific evidence. Also the compliance score at 24 h had better results in the group b (average 14.0, range 13.0–16.0) in comparison with group a (average 18.0, range 17.0–21.4) (p < 0.001).


Transradial approach improves the compliance and VAS of patients undergone to UAE.


Leiomyoma Femoral artery Radial artery Pain measurement Patient compliance 



Uterine artery embolization


Visual analog score






Institutional review board


International normalized ratio


Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug


Radial artery




Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Michael TT, Alomar M, Papayannis A et al (2013) A randomized comparison of the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary artery bypass graft angiography and intervention: the RADIAL-CABG Trial (RADIAL Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography and Intervention). JACC Cardiovasc Interv 6(11):1138–1144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cooper CJ, El-Sheiekn RA, Cohen DJ et al (1999) Effect of transradial access on quality of life and cost of cardiac catheterization; a randomized comparison. Am Heart J 138:430–436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Resnick NJ, Kim E, Patel RS, Lookstein RA, Nowkowski SF, Fischman MA (2014) Uterine artery embolization using a transradial approach: initial experience and technique. J Vasc Interv Radiol 25:443–447CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hibbert B, Simard S, Wilson KR et al (2012) Transradial versus transfemoral artery approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in the extremely obese. J Am Coll Cariol Interv 5:819–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barbeau GR, Arsenault F, Dugas L, Simard S, Larivière MM (2004) Evaluation of the ulnopalmar arterial arches with pulse oximetry and plethysmography: comparison with the Allen’s test in 1010 patients. Am Heart J 147(3):489–493CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Filippiadis DK, Binkert C, Pellerin O, Hoffmann RT, Krajina A, Pereira PL (2017) Cirse quality assurance document and standards for classification of complications: the cirse classification system. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 40(8):1141–1146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rao SV, Ou FS, Wang TY et al (2008) Trends in the prevalence and outcomes of radial and femoral approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Interv 1(4):379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jolly SS, Amlani S, Hamon M, Yusuf S, Mehta SR (2009) Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am Heart J 157(1):132–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iezzi R, Pompili M, Posa A et al (2017) Transradial versus transfemoral access for hepatic chemoembolization: intrapatient prospective single-center study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 28(9):1234–1239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar AJ, Jones LE, Kollmeyer KR et al (2017) Radial artery access for peripheral endovascular procedures. J Vasc Surg 66(3):820–825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Posham R, Biederman DM, Patel RS et al (2016) Transradial approach for noncoronary interventions: a single-center review of safety and feasibility in the first 1,500 cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 27(2):159–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cartwright SL, Knudson MP (2008) Evaluation of acute abdominal pain in adults. Am Family Phys 77(7):971–978Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Medical Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Basile
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alberto Rebonato
    • 3
  • Giovanni Failla
    • 4
  • Giuseppe Caltabiano
    • 2
  • Andrea Boncoraglio
    • 1
    • 7
    Email author
  • Cecilia Gozzo
    • 1
  • Alessandro Motta
    • 1
  • Pietro Valerio Foti
    • 1
  • Stefano Palmucci
    • 1
  • Alfonso Juanjo García
    • 5
  • Josè Garcia-Medina
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of Radiodiagnostic and RadiotherapyUniversity Hospital “Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele”CataniaItaly
  2. 2.Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology DepartmentGaribaldi HospitalCataniaItaly
  3. 3.Radiology InstituteUniversity of PerugiaPerugiaItaly
  4. 4.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyAzienda Ospedaliera per l’Emergenza “Cannizzaro”CataniaItaly
  5. 5.Division of Preventive Medicine and Public HealthUniversity of Murcia School of MedicineMurciaSpain
  6. 6.Department of Vascular and Interventional RadiologyGeneral University Hospital “Reina Sofia”MurciaSpain
  7. 7.ModicaItaly

Personalised recommendations