Abstract
We performed a prospective observational study of 215 patients (58 ± 11 years) and compared the outcomes of ultrasound guided ulnar (n = 98, 45.6%) vs. radial (n = 117, 54.4%) cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients selected by an ultrasound based algorithm. Primary endpoints included the number of access attempts and conversion to femoral access. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, repeat revascularization, stent thrombosis, in-stent restenosis, and access site complications. No significant difference was found in the primary endpoints between radial or ulnar. Ulnar access showed no significant hematomas. Therefore, ulnar PCI is a feasible alternative.