Percutaneous Coronary Intervention pada Sindrom Koroner Akut: Radial atau Femoral

Oleh :

dr.Eva Naomi Oretla

Percutaneous coronary intervention atau intervensi koroner perkutan pada sindrom koroner akut dapat dilakukan dengan pendekatan radial atau femoral. Masing-masing pendekatan ini mempunyai kelebihan dan kekurangan tersendiri.[1.2]

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) merupakan prosedur revaskularisasi utama yang dilakukan pada sindrom koroner akut (SKA) untuk memulihkan aliran darah. PCI dipilih karena efikasinya yang signifikan untuk mencegah kejadian SKA berulang dan sifatnya yang kurang invasif bila dibandingkan dengan prosedur bedah seperti CABG (Coronary Artery Bypass Graft).[1-3]

Meskipun kurang invasif, PCI merupakan tindakan yang tentunya juga memiliki risiko, misalnya access-site bleeding atau perdarahan pada lokasi puncture. Dalam hal ini, lokasi puncture adalah arteri femoralis atau arteri radialis, yang merupakan tempat masuknya guiding catheter dan guidewire. Untuk itu, pemilihan akses vaskular sangat penting dalam tindakan PCI karena berdampak terhadap luaran klinis pasien.[3-5]

(Konten ini khusus untuk dokter. Registrasi untuk baca selengkapnya)

Referensi

1. Kumbhani D J, Cibotti-Sun M, Moore M K. 2025 Acute Coronary Syndromes Guideline-at-a-Glance. JACC. 2025;0:1-7. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2025.01.018
2. Popova N V. Coronary Revascularization in Stable Coronary Artery Disease State of the Art. EJCM. 2023;11(4):127-138. DOI:10.32596/ejcm.galenos.2024.2023-6-19
3. Rao S V, O’Donoghue Michelle L, et al. 2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2025;151:e771–e862. DOI:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001309
4. Galli M, Laborante R, Andreotti F, et al. Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022;23(8):286. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2308286
5. Thibert M J, Fordyce C B, Cairns J A, et al. Access-Site vs Non-Access-Site Major Bleeding and In-Hospital Outcomes Among STEMI Patients Receiving Primary PCI. CJC Open. 2021;3:864-871. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjco.2021.02.009
6. Bajraktari G, Rexhaj Z, et al. Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Clin Med. 2021;10(2163):1-15. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10102163
7. Dworeck C, Bjorn R, Volz S, et al. Radial artery access is associated with lower mortality in patients undergoing primary PCI: a report from the SWEDEHEART registry. European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care. 2020;9(4):323–332. DOI:10.1177/2048872620908032
8. Ahmad M, Mehta P, et al. Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. StatPearls. 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556123/
9. Perhimpunan Dokter Spesialis Kardiovaskular Indonesia. Pedoman Tata Laksana Sindrom Koroner Akut Edisi ke-5. PERKI. 2024. https://www.inaheart.org/guidelines/pedoman-tata-laksana-sindrom-koroner-akut
10. Manda YR, et al. Cardiac Catheterization Risks and Complications. StatPearls. 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK531461/
11. Dangoisse V, Burzotta F, et al. Guiding Catheters for Transradial Approach: New Designs and Summary of Experiences with VDL/VDR Catheters. A Novel Score for PCI Technical Complexity. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine. 2022;38:111-116. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2021.08.017
12. Majeed Z, Tariq M H, Ahmed A, et al. Comparison of Sheathless and Sheathed Guiding Catheters in Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Interventional Cardiology. 2024;2777585:1-6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/2777585
13. Langer C, Prog R. Arterial Accesses in Coronary Angiography and Intervention - Review with a Focus on Prognostic Relevance. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022;23(10):331. DOI:https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2310331
14. Imam Safaaa S, et al. Radial versus Femoral Access in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2024;96:2741-2747.
15. Krittanawong C, et al. Complications of Radial vs Femoral Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention: What Do the Data Tell Us?. The American Journal of Medicine. 2024;137:483−489.
16. Senguttuvan N B, et al. Trans-radial approach versus trans-femoral approach in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(4):e0266709. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266709
17. Le May M, Wells G, et al. Safety and Efficacy of Femoral Access vs Radial Access in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction The SAFARI-STEMI Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5(2):126-134. DOI:10.1001/jamacardio.2019.4852
18. Reddy KB, Kumar V. Evaluating Radial vs. Femoral Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention at a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Prospective Observational Study. European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine (EJCM). 2025;15(3):173-180.