A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing the Safety of Percutaneous and Open Brachial Access in the Endovascular Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Lesion

Plain-language summary

Endovascular treatment tends to replace open surgery in the management of peripheral arterial disease. Access via the common femoral artery remains the primary approach for peripheral arterial interventions. Brachial artery access has emerged as a valid alternative when femoral access is not feasible. Brachial access can be achieved either percutaneously or through an open surgical approach at the elbow. A limited number of studies have reported complication rates associated with open and percutaneous brachial access in the treatment of peripheral arterial disease. These studies have shown higher complication rates for percutaneous access (ranging from 6% to 9%) compared with open brachial access (ranging from 1% to 2%). However, no direct comparison between the two approaches has been reported to date. This study is the first to provide a direct, prospective, randomized comparison between open brachial access and percutaneous brachial access

Who can participate

What they're measuring

Trial details