Transradial versus transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention of left main disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of transradial (TR) versus transfemoral (TF) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in left main (LM) lesion. Background TR-PCI is the preferred approach compared with TF approach because of less bleeding risk. LM-PCI is often challenging because of the anatomical complexity and uniqueness of supplying a large myocardium territory. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of TR-PCI compared with TF-PCI of the LM lesions. Methods A comprehensive literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane database was conducted to identify studies that reported the comparable outcomes between both approaches. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Results A total of eight studies were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. TR-PCI resulted in lower bleeding risk (OR 0.31, 95%CI 0.18-0.52, P < 0.01, I-2 = 0%) while maintaining similar procedural success rate, target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and all-cause mortality during the study follow-up period. Conclusions TR-PCI may achieve similar efficacy with decreased bleeding risk compared to TF-PCI in LM lesions. When operator experience and anatomical complexity are favorable, TR approach is an attractive alternative access over TF approach in LM-PCI.