Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05702060

Randomized Comparison of Radiation Exposure to Operators in Coronary Intervention Between Right Radial and Left DRA

The purpose of this study is to show that the radiation exposure of the left distal radial artery approach is superior to the conventional right radial artery approach in terms of less radiation exposure.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Age range

20 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Wŏnju, Gangwon-do, South Korea

Loading trial locations.

About this study

The conventional radial approach is now recognized as the basic technique in coronary artery surgery. Compared to the femoral artery access, the main advantage is the increased stability due to the reduction of massive bleeding. Due to these advantages, recent guidelines recommend the conventional radial approach as the basic approach for all acute myocardial infarction (AMI) cases with or without ST-segment elevation. In particular, in the case of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), new antiplatelet agents such as Ticagrelor and Prasugrel and strong antiplatelet agents such as Glycoprotein inhibitors have been used to prevent major vascular complications. For these many operators, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through the radial artery is recommended. At this time, the operator prefers the right radial artery approach because of the comfort of performing the procedure on the patient's right side. However, the operator sometimes has to substitute the left radial artery or femoral artery access due to difficulty in manipulating the catheter due to severe tortuousness of the right subclavian artery. Although the left radial artery approach requires less operation time and radiographic imaging time due to less tortuousness of the left subclavian artery, the right conventional radial approach is still preferred due to the ergonomic inconvenience of having to lean toward the patient. Patients undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) were randomly assigned to the left snuffbox approach and the right conventional radial approach, and the surgeons' radiation exposure between the two approaches was evaluated and compared.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged 20 years or older
  • Patients scheduled for coronary angiography and intervention

Exclusion criteria

  • When the pulse of the Left distal radial artery cannot be palpated
  • When the pulse of the right conventional radial artery cannot be palpated
  • In case of arteriovenous fistula
  • Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients
  • In case femoral artery access must be performed (state of shock, etc.)
  • In case of atrioventricular block
  • When an ergonovine provocation test is required
  • When the patient refuses to consent to the study
  • a pregnant or nursing woman

Treatment and study plan

Radial Artery Puncture Method for Coronary Angiography and Intervention

Procedure

Radial Artery Puncture Method for Coronary Angiography and Intervention

Primary outcomes

  1. Radiation exposure examination

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Radiation exposure for surgeons in the case of the left distal radial artery approach and the right radial artery approach, respectively

Secondary outcomes

  1. Fluoroscopy time

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Fluoroscopy time

  2. Corrected by X-ray dose Radiation exposure of surgeons

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Corrected by X-ray dose Radiation exposure of surgeons

  3. Corrected by X-ray dose Radiation

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Corrected by X-ray dose Radiation

  4. Hemostasis time

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Hemostasis time

  5. Procedure success rate

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Procedure success rate

  6. Amount of contrast agent used

    Time frame: Through procedure completion, up to 24 hours

    Amount of contrast agent used

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Yonsei University

Other

Collaborators

  • Myung In Pharm

Registry information

Official study title

Comparison of raDiatiOn Exposure to Operators in Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Between Right Conventional and Left Distal Radial artEry Approach: Multicenter, Randomized Study

Acronym: DOSE

Important dates

Study start
2023
Primary completion
2025
Study completion
2025
First posted
Jan 27, 2023
Registry last updated
Nov 21, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.