A randomised control trial to compare conventional and haemostatic dressings in radial arterial access: Assessment of Radial Artery Complications Whilst Achieving Rapid Haemostasis (ARCH Trial).

Claudio Proscia¹, Ian Kemp², Janet Barton³, Rhian Murphy⁴, Rod H Stables⁵

¹Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Drive, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: claudio.proscia@lhch.nhs.uk.

²Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Drive, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: ian.kemp@lhch.nhs.uk.

³Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Drive, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: janet.barton@lhch.nhs.uk.

⁴Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Drive, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: rhian.murphy@lhch.nhs.uk.

⁵Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Drive, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: rod.stables@lhch.nhs.uk.

PubMed DOI

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This trial aimed to compare conventional and haemostatic dressings in achieving rapid and effective radial artery haemostasis following coronary procedures. BACKGROUND: In small studies, using a haemostatic dressing is associated with expedited haemostasis and a reduced duration of external radial compression. METHODS: Patients were randomised to one of three compression strategies:…

Create a free account to keep reading

Free members get 10 full research views every month across publications, clinical trials, FDA clearances, adverse events, and NIH grants. No credit card required.

Create Free Account Sign In

Want unlimited research access? See Pro plans

Data Accuracy Notice: Research intelligence on Health AI Central is aggregated from public sources (PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, NIH, CMS, and others) and refreshed nightly. Classifications and derived metrics are produced by automated methods described in our Methodology. We recommend verifying critical data points against the primary sources before making decisions.