Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41325338›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Single catheter strategy for transradial angiography and primary percutaneous coronary intervention enhances procedural efficiency, microvascular outcomes, and cost-effectiveness: Implications for STEMI healthcare in resource-limited settings.

Mohajit Arneja, Swetharajan Gunasekar, Dharaneswari Hari Narayanan, Joshma Joseph, Harilalith Kovvuri, Sharath Shanmugam, Pavitraa Saravana Kumar, Asuwin Anandaram, Vinod Kumar Balakrishnan, Jayanty Venkata Balasubramaniyan and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Mohajit ArnejaDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Swetharajan GunasekarDepartment of Clinical Research, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Dharaneswari Hari NarayananDepartment of Clinical Research, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Joshma JosephDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Harilalith KovvuriDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sharath ShanmugamDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Pavitraa Saravana KumarDepartment of Clinical Research, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Asuwin AnandaramDepartment of Internal Medicine, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9001-0342
Vinod Kumar BalakrishnanDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Jayanty Venkata BalasubramaniyanDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sadhanandham ShanmugasundaramDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sankaran RameshDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Nagendra Boopathy SenguttuvanDepartment of Cardiology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (SRIHER), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4979-596X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFaster time to reperfusion can be achieved by minimizing various patient and system-level delays that contribute to total ischemic time. Procedural delays within the catheterization laboratory represent a non-negligible and modifiable component in the chain of reperfusion, but remain unquantified by conventional metrics such as door-to-ballon (D2B) time. Universal catheter approaches have rapidly gained traction as an alternative to the traditional two catheter approach for transradial coronary interventions. However, their utility for both diagnostic angiography and subsequent angioplasty is limited, and the impact of this strategy on reperfusion outcomes has remained unexplored. We utilized a procedural metric termed fluoroscopy-to-device (FluTD) time to quantify the efficiency of a single catheter strategy, and assessed its impact on epicardial and myocardial perfusion. METHODS AND

resultsIn this retrospective study, consecutive STEMI patients undergoing transradial primary PCI (pPCI) at a tertiary care center in India between May 2022 to October 2024 were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: 51 underwent PCI using a single universal guiding catheter (UGC), and 51 underwent the conventional two-catheter (CTC) approach. The primary outcome of the study was a comparison of the FluTD time between the two procedural strategies. Secondary outcomes included myocardial blush grade (MBG), Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade, total fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, device safety and efficacy, and procedural success. The median FluTD time was significantly shorter in the UGC compared to the CTC group (3 minutes [IQR 3-4] vs. 10 minutes [IQR 8-17], p < 0.001), with a higher proportion of patients in the former achieving myocardial blush grade (MBG) of 3 (86.3% vs. 54.9%, p = 0.004), indicating superior microvascular reperfusion. Despite a higher incidence of bifurcation lesions (33.3% vs 11.8, p = 0.04) and left main (LM) interventions (7.8% vs 0%, p = 0.04) among patients in the UGC cohort, the single catheter strategy maintained superior procedural efficiency without increased complication rates.

conclusionA single catheter strategy for both angiography and pPCI in STEMI patients was associated with a significant reduction in FluTD time and improved microvascular perfusion, without compromising device safety or efficacy. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where intra- and extra-procedural delays are often more pronounced, inclusion of the single catheter strategy can optimize catheterization workflows and yield substantial cost-savings.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyPercutaneous Coronary InterventionST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedRadial ArteryResource-Limited SettingsRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID41325338
PMCPMC12668517

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.