Front. Pediatr.Frontiers in PediatricsFront. Pediatr.2296-2360Frontiers Media S.A.10.3389/fped.2025.1611065Original ResearchEfficacy and safety of arterial blood gas analysis via distal radial artery in childrenYangLing1†Data curationInvestigationWriting – original draftDingHeng2†Formal analysisSoftwareWriting – original draftZhouXiaoting2†InvestigationMethodologyWriting – original draftShuShiting2Formal analysisWriting – original draftMaoWenjie2InvestigationWriting – original draftCaiGaojun3Data curationFormal analysisMethodologyWriting – original draftZhaoYidong2Data curationWriting – original draftWanYu2*‡ConceptualizationProject administrationResourcesSupervisionWriting – review & editingHuangZhiying2*‡ConceptualizationFunding acquisitionResourcesValidationVisualizationWriting – review & editingDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The Affiliated Changzhou Second People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, ChinaDepartment of Paediatrics, The Affiliated Changzhou Second People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, ChinaDepartment of Cardiology, Wujin Hospital Affiliated with Jiangsu University, The Wujin Clinical College of Xuzhou Medical University, Changzhou, ChinaCorrespondence: Yu Wan wanyuerke@163.com Zhiying Huang hzy982@njmu.edu.cn
These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship
These authors have contributed equally to this work
The distal transradial approach is widely accepted in adult cardiovascular interventions and invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring. However, limited evidence exists regarding the efficacy and safety of arterial blood gas analysis (ABGA) via the distal radial artery (DRA) in children.
Methods
This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of arterial puncture via the DRA compared with the conventional radial artery (CRA) for ABGA in children.
Results
A total of 240 children were allocated to either the DRA group (n = 140) or the CRA group (n = 100). The success rate (82.1% vs. 92.0%, p = 0.029) and one-needle success rate (75.7% vs. 89.0%, p = 0.009) were significantly lower in the DRA group. Puncture time in the DRA group was significantly longer than that in the CRA group, whereas hemostasis time was shorter in the DRA group. The incidences of incorrect venipuncture (11.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.002) and thumb numbness (5.7% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.022) in the DRA group were significantly higher than those in the CRA group. However, the incidence of hematoma (modified EASY Ia type) in the DRA group was significantly lower than that in the CRA group (8.6% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the incidences of hemorrhage or radial artery occlusion between the two groups.
Conclusion
DRA puncture for ABGA in children appears to be a safe and practical alternative to CRA. Although first-attempt success is slightly lower and training is required, the reduced risk of hematoma and shorter hemostasis time make it a promising option for clinical use.
arterial blood gas analysisdistal radial arteryradial arteryconventional radial arterychildrenThe author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This study was supported by grants from the Applied Basic Research Programs of Science, Technology Department Of Changzhou City (CJ20230067), the Changzhou High Level Medical Talents Training Project (2022CZBJ102). The funders had no role in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication.section-at-acceptanceGeneral Pediatrics and Pediatric Emergency CareBackground
Arterial blood gas analysis (ABGA) is a common procedure for children with acute and critical respiratory diseases (1). It is performed at sites such as the conventional radial artery (CRA), femoral, and dorsalis pedis arteries, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Puncture of the CRA for ABGA in children is most widely used in clinical practice due to its superficial location, high success rate, patient comfort, and short compression hemostasis time (2). However, transradial blood gas collection can lead to puncture-related complications. These include pseudoaneurysm, carpal tunnel syndrome, severe hemorrhage, and radial artery occlusion (RAO) (3–6).
In recent years, the distal radial approach has been widely adopted in adult cardiovascular interventions and invasive arterial pressure monitoring (7–9). Although the success rate of distal radial artery (DRA) puncture is lower than that of CRA puncture, it has the advantage of reducing RAO risk and hemostasis time (10). An occluded radial artery not only limits future use (11) but may also impair hand development in children. The preservation of the CRA is a critical consideration in children. This is due to their greater need for “vascular capital”, as they have a much longer lifespan than adults. However, limited research has addressed the safety and effectiveness of ABGA via DRA in children. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ABGA via DRA in children at our center.
MethodsStudy population
Children requiring ABGA for severe respiratory diseases in the Department of Paediatrics were enrolled in two time periods. In the first stage (August to September 2023), ABGA via DRA was performed. In the second stage (December 2024 to March 2025), ABGA via CRA was performed. Inclusion criteria: children aged 2–14 years scheduled for ABGA. Exclusion criteria: (1) absence of a clearly palpable radial artery; (2) puncture contraindications; (3) designated nurse not on duty; and (4) refusal to sign informed consent. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Affiliated Changzhou Second People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University [Approval number: (2023) YLJSA069]. Written informed consent was obtained from each participant and/or guardian.
Procedure of DRA puncture
A nurse (Xiaoting Zhou) with experience in >5,000 ABGA procedures via CRA but none via DRA was assigned to perform the punctures. For DRA puncture, the child placed the hand a functional position on a small mat. After local disinfection and locating the DRA pulse, the nurse held the scalp needle (0.55 × 16.2 mm) and inserted it into the AS at a 30–45° angle (Figure 1A). After collecting blood, manual hemostasis was applied. For CRA puncture, the child's forearm was externally rotated with the palm facing upward, and the wrist slightly dorsiflexed. The operator palpated the strongest radial artery pulse near the medial side of the radial styloid process to identify the puncture site (Figure 1B). The remaining steps mirrored those of DRA puncture.
Procedure of arterial puncture [(A), distal radial artery (B), conventional radial artery]. After local disinfection and locating the artery pulse, the nurse held the scalp needle (0.55 × 16.2 mm) and inserted it into the AS at a 30–45° angle.
A two-panel image showing a healthcare professional drawing blood from children' hands. The left panel depicts a patient with a wristband, while the professional uses a syringe to draw blood through distal radial artery. The right panel shows another syringe extracting blood through proximal radial artery.Definition
Puncture time was defined as the interval from the end of disinfection to successful arterial puncture. Puncture success was defined as obtaining an arterial blood gas sample within 2 min. Each needle insertion represented one skin puncture (2). Bleeding was classified using the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria (12). Forearm hematoma was defined as swelling near the puncture site following blood gas sample collection and classified using the modified EASY (Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries Study) scale, as detailed by Tsigkas G et al. (13).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 21.0. Categorical data were expressed as numbers (percentages) and compared using the chi-squared or Fisher's exact test. Continuous variables were reported as means ± standard deviations if normally distributed, which were tested using Kolmogorov–Smirnov method. Comparison between groups was performed using the t-test; Otherwise, medians (interquartile range) were reported and analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Changes in DRA puncture success rates over time were assessed using a trend P test. To eliminate confounding factors, logistic regression model was used to investigate the independent influencing factors of the puncture success rate, adjusting for age (≥6 years old or ˂6 years old), gender (boy or girl), and BMI (≥15.09 kg/m2 or ˂15.09 kg/m2). Age and BMI were dichotomized at the median. A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
ResultsParticipant characteristics
Table 1 presents the characteristics of the participants. A total of 240 participants, aged 6 (4–8) years, were included. Among them, 111 (49.3%) were male. Based on the initial puncture site, participants were classified into the DRA group (n = 140) and the CRA group (n = 100). There were no significant differences between the two groups in age, sex, height, weight, or vital signs. Platelet and glucose levels were significantly higher in the DRA group than in the CRA group, whereas body mass index (BMI) and creatinine in the DRA group were significantly lower than those in the CRA group.
Comparison of the demographics and clinical characteristics between DRA and CRA groups.
Variables
Total (n = 240)
CRA (n = 100)
DRA (n = 140)
t/Z/χ2
P
Demographic
Age, y
6 (4–8)
6 (4–9)
6 (4–8)
0.85
0.394
Boy, n(%)
111 (46.3)
43 (43.0)
68 (48.6)
0.73
0.393
Hight, cm
120.0 (105.0–135.0)
119.0 (105.0–141.8)
120.0 (105.0–134.8)
0.60
0.546
Weight, kg
21.0 (16.1–29.0)
21.5 (17.0–32.6)
21.0 (15.5–27.8)
1.77
0.077
BMI, kg/cm2
15.1 (13.9–16.5)
15.7 (14.4–17.7)
14.7 (13.6–16.4)
2.94
0.003
Vital sign
SBP, mmHg
104.1 ± 11.5
104.4 ± 10.7
103.9 ± 12.1
0.34
0.730
DBP, mmHg
66.0 ± 8.5
66.7 ± 8.2
65.5 ± 8.7
1.13
0.260
HR, bpm
104.3 ± 15.7
105.9 ± 15.0
103.1 ± 16.1
1.33
0.183
Laboratory findings
WBC, 109/L
7.1 (5.7–9.8)
7.1 (5.7–9.6)
7.1 (5.8–9.9)
0.63
0.532
HGB, g/L
122.0 (116.0 −127.0)
123.5 (117.0–130.0)
122.0 (115.3–127.0)
1.66
0.094
PLT, 109/L
299.5 (238.5–358.8)
290.5 (224.3–344.3)
308.5 (249.3–374.8)
2.38
0.017
ALT, u/L
27.0 (22.2–32.0)
27.7 (23.5–32.7)
26.2 (22.0–31.0)
1.39
0.165
AST, u/L
11.9 (9.1–14.7)
12 (9.3–16.0)
11.8 (9.0–14.0)
0.68
0.519
Cr, μmol/L
30.7 (26.8–36.2)
33.5 (29.3–38.2)
28.5 (24.7–33.4)
5.25
˂0.001
Glu, mmol/L
5.3 (4.7–6.0)
5.2 (4.6–5.6)
5.4 (4.8–6.3)
2.61
0.009
Data are presented as n (%), median (interquartile range), or mean ± SD; CRA, conventional radial artery; DRA, distal radial artery; BMI, body mass index; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; HR, heart rate; WBC, white blood cell; HGB, hemoglobin; PLT, platelet; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate transaminase; Cr, creatinine; Glu, glucose.
Comparison of ABGA effectiveness between DRA and CRA groups
Right-side puncture was performed in 96.4% of cases in the DRA group and 100.0% in the CRA group (p > 0.05). The puncture success rate (82.1% vs. 92.0%, p = 0.029) and one-needle success rate (75.7% vs. 89.0%, p = 0.009) were significantly lower in the DRA group than in the CRA group (Table 2). Logistic regression model was used to eliminate confounding factors. After adjusting for age, gender, and BMI, the results showed that DRA was the independent influencing factors of the puncture success rate (For success rate, adjusted p = 0.032; For one-needle success rate, adjusted p = 0.014). In addition, the puncture time in the DRA group was significantly longer than that in the CRA group. However, the hemostasis time was shorter in the DRA group.
Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of ABGA between DRA and CRA groups.
Variables
CRA (n = 100)
DRA (n = 140)
Z/χ2
P
Right side, n(%)
100 (100.0)
135 (96.4)
3.65
0.077
Success rate, n(%)
92 (92.0)
115 (82.1)
4.78
0.029
One-needle success rate, n(%)
89 (89.0)
106 (75.7)
6.76
0.009
Puncture time, s
4.0 (2.0–11.0)
15.5 (5.0–35.0)
6.51
˂0.001
Hemostasis time, s
60.0 (60.0–60.0)
60.0 (60.0–60.0)
2.66
0.008
Venous puncture, n(%)
1 (1.0)
16 (11.4)
9.64
0.002
Bleeding, n(%)
0 (0.0)
1 (0.7)
0.72
1.000
Hematoma, n(%)
50 (50.0)
12 (8.6)
52.26
˂0.001
Numbness, n(%)
0 (0.0)
8 (5.7)
5.91
0.022
VAS
4.0 (2.0–4.0)
4.0 (2.0–7.0)
3.91
˂0.001
DRA or RPA occlusion, n(%)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
-
-
ABGA, arterial blood gas analysis; DRA, distal radial artery; CRA, conventional radial artery; VAS, visual analogue score.
To examine changes in DRA puncture success over time, patients were divided into 14 groups (10 per group). The success rate ranged from 50.0% to 100.0%, showing a non-significant upward trend (Figure 2).
The change of success rate in DRA puncture over time.
Line graph with red data points showing fluctuating percentages from 30% to 100% over intervals of ten on the x-axis. A dotted trend line indicates a slight upward trend.Comparison of the safety of ABGA between DRA and CRA groups
The incidence of incorrect venipuncture was significantly higher in the DRA group than in the CRA group (11.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.002). Additionally, the incidence of thumb numbness and the VAS scores were significantly higher than in the DRA group than those in the CRA group. However, hematoma (modified EASY I type) occurred in 12 cases in the DRA group, significantly fewer than in the CRA group (8.6% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the incidences of hemorrhage or RAO between the two groups.
Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the efficacy and safety of ABGA via the DRA in children. The findings suggest that DRA can serve as an alternative for arterial blood gas sampling, although its puncture success and one-needle success rates were lower than those of CRA.
The radial artery is increasingly used for arterial access during cardiovascular interventions and for blood pressure monitoring under anesthesia in children (14–17). The standard ABGA site is 1–2 cm proximal to the wrist transverse striation, that is, the CRA. One-needle blood gas sampling via the CRA has a success rate of approximately 90% (6). In patients with a weak pulse or repeated failed attempts, ultrasound-guided puncture may enhance success (2). However, the radial artery is vulnerable to damage, particularly with repeated access (6). With increasing life expectancy, radial artery preservation is gaining importance, as the vessel may be reused in procedures such as interventional access, coronary artery bypass grafting, or arteriovenous fistula hemodialysis (18–20). Damaged radial arteries may compromise future use (11), prompting calls for increased protection (21, 22). The DRA, located distal to the radial styloid process, travels beneath the AS and through the first and second metacarpal spaces to form the deep palmar arch (23). Due to its superficial position and underlying bony support, the DRA is favorable for puncture and compression. Even when the radial pulse is weak, successful puncture is possible due to its anatomical course through the first and second metacarpal spaces (24, 25).
To date, the efficacy and safety of using the DRA in cardiovascular intervention and perioperative arterial blood pressure monitoring in adults have been well demonstrated (8, 9, 26–28). Studies have shown that compared with the CRA approach, the DRA approach can significantly shorten compression hemostasis time and reduce RAO and other vascular access-related complications (8, 26). However, prolonged puncture time and relatively low success rate remain disadvantages of DRA in cardiovascular intervention, largely due to the learning curve, smaller diameter, and tortuosity of the artery. In cases of failed sheath placement following successful needle puncture, the most common cause is the inability to advance the guidewire (13). A recent non-inferiority randomized controlled trial found no significant difference in first-attempt success rates for arterial blood sampling via DRA compared with CRA in adults (77.8% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.72), although the sample size was relatively small (29). However, reports on the use of DRA puncture in children remain limited. In the present study, we reported preliminary experience regarding the efficacy and safety of ABGA via DRA in children. As expected, the success rate (82.1% vs. 92.0%) and one-needle success rate (75.7% vs. 89.0%) for DRA were significantly lower than those for CRA. Several factors may explain the lower success rate. First, anatomical characteristics of the DRA in children contribute to puncture difficulty. The average radial artery diameter in children has been reported as 1.39 mm in males and 1.57 mm in females, smaller than in adults and increasing gradually with age (17, 30). Our previous study found that the mean DRA diameter in children was 1.97 ± 0.37 mm, increasing with age and BMI, and smaller than that of the CRA (31). A smaller vessel diameter may reduce puncture success. In addition to vessel size, low BMI was also an independent risk factor for puncture failure (32). In this study, BMI in the DRA group was lower than in the CRA group. Moreover, nurse experience with DRA puncture played an important role in success rates. Studies in cardiovascular intervention via DRA have identified a learning curve, with puncture time stabilizing after approximately 150 procedures (33). To assess whether a learning curve existed in DRA puncture, patients were divided into time-based subgroups. Although not statistically significant, a trend toward improved success over time was observed, likely due to the small sample size. It is important for operators to be familiar with the anatomy of the DRA and receive training in the puncture technique to improve the success rate.
During DRA puncture, positioning the child's hand in a functional posture may improve comfort. Additionally, the incidence of complications such as hematoma was lower in the DRA group. However, incorrect venipuncture and finger numbness were common, which may be related to the anatomy of the DAR. In the DRA group, 64% (16/25) of puncture failures resulted from incorrect venipuncture. The cephalic veins on the dorsal hand are well developed. In the AS region, the cephalic vein may overlie the radial artery, necessitating caution during puncture. The superficial branch of the radial nerve (SBRN), which innervates the dorsoradial skin and two-and-a-half fingers, also traverses the AS. Theoretically, blind puncture carries the risk of nerve injury (34). In adult, the mean horizontal and vertical distances from the DRA to the SBRN were 5.10 (2.60–7.90) mm and 2.40 (1.70–3.20) mm, respectively. The horizontal distances was less than 5.0 mm in 49% of patients (35). However, there is currently an absence of research data in the paediatric population. When compared to the CRA group, the DRA group required more puncture attempts and a longer time, which might elevate the risk of complications. These risks tend to decrease with accumulated experience. In addition, ultrasound guided puncture might reduce the complications in children. RAO in the DRA and/or CRA was not observed in this study. However, assessment was based on pulse palpation, which may underestimate true incidence. The median hemostasis time was 60 s. This short duration is a clear advantage of DRA use.
Limitations
First, this was a small-sample observational study evaluating the efficacy and safety of ABGA via DRA in children. Retrospective study also has inherent limitation in statistical power. Prospective, multicenter, large-sample, randomized controlled studies are needed for further clarification. Second, ABGA was performed by only one nurse experienced in CRA puncture but not in DRA puncture, contributing to a relatively low initial success rate due to the learning curve, which was a key limitation of the study. However, it truly reflects the learning curve of an operator experienced in CRA puncture when adopting the DRA puncture. It is encouraging that even for operators with limited experience in DRA puncture, the success rate of puncture exceeds 80.0%. Randomized-controlled study conducted by operators with extensive experience both in DRA and CRA puncture have registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2500108780), which may provide evidence on whether ABGA via DRA is non-inferior to the CRA. Third, two-period design due to the off-site training of the operator, may lead to potential temporal and selection bias. However, the patients were consecutively enrolled in two periods to minimize selection bias. In addition, logistic regression model was also used to eliminate confounding factors. Fourth, no ultrasound follow-up was performed to assess arterial injury, and the long-term impact of DRA puncture remains unclear. The method of palpation may underestimate the incidence of RAO, due to the presence of palmar arch circulation. Therefore, the absence of RAO in the study should be interpreted cautiously.
Conclusion
DRA puncture for ABGA in children appears to be a safe and practical alternative to CRA. Although first-attempt success is slightly lower and training is required, the reduced risk of hematoma and shorter hemostasis time make it a promising option for clinical use.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by the Ethics Committee of the Affiliated Changzhou Second People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants' legal guardians/next of kin.
Author contributions
LY: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original draft. HD: Formal analysis, Software, Writing – original draft. XZ: Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft. SS: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. WM: Investigation, Writing – original draft. GC: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft. YZ: Data curation, Writing – original draft. YW: Conceptualization, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. ZH: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing.
Acknowledgments
We thank all our colleagues at the Department of paediatrics, the Affiliated Changzhou Second People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
ReferencesLilienTAde SonnavilleESVvan WoenselJBMBemRA. The local and systemic exposure to oxygen in children with severe bronchiolitis on invasive mechanical ventilation: a retrospective cohort study. Pediatr Crit Care Med. (2023) 24(2):e115–20. 10.1097/PCC.000000000000313036661429Genre GrandpierreRBobbiaXMullerLMarkarianTOccéanBVPommetSUltrasound guidance in difficult radial artery puncture for blood gas analysis: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. (2019) 14(3):e0213683. 10.1371/journal.pone.021368330893349RussoGCherubiniAFisicaroMCioffiGDi LenardaA. Radial pseudoaneurysm after a puncture for blood gas analysis. Am J Emerg Med. (2016) 4(4):757.e1–2. 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.07.064BisaryaKGeorgeSEl SallakhS. CASE REPORT acute compartment syndrome of the forearm following blood gas analysis postthrombolysis for pulmonary embolism. Eplasty. (2013) 13:e15. PMID 2357333523573335Marcos VidalJMBaticón EscuderoPMHiguera MiguelezEFiz MatíasJ. Hemorragia grave de la arteria radial secundaria a punción para gasometría en un insuficiente renal en tratamiento con antiagregantes [severe bleeding from the radial artery after puncture for blood gas analysis in a patient with kidney failure receiving antiplatelet therapy]. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. (2008) 55(1):55–6. 10.1016/s0034-9356(08)70503-618333392LaursenCBPedersenRLLassenAT. Ultrasonographically guided puncture of the radial artery for blood gas analysis: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med. (2015) 65(5):618–9. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.01.01625910767LiFShiGWYuXLSongRXXiaoJQHuangHMSafety and efficacy of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention via distal transradial artery access in the anatomical snuffbox: a single-centre prospective cohort study using a propensity score method. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. (2022) 22(1):74. 10.1186/s12872-022-02518-835236288LiLMZhangLYHuangHMChenTLiFShiGWEfficacy and safety of coronary intervention via distal transradial access (dTRA) in patients with low body mass index. J Interv Cardiol. (2022) 2022:1901139. 10.1155/2022/190113936082307CumitiniLGiubertoniARossiLPattiG. Distal radial artery approach for invasive blood pressure monitoring in intensive cardiac care unit. Am J Cardiol. (2025) 248:16–22. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2025.04.00540216289BarbarawiMBarbarawiOJailaniMAl-AbdouhAMhannaMRobinsonP. Traditional versus distal radial access for coronary angiography: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Coron Artery Dis. (2023) 34(4):274–80. 10.1097/MCA.000000000000123637102230ChadowDSolettiGJGaudinoM. Never again. Once used for cardiac catherization the radial artery cannot be used for CABG. J Card Surg. (2021) 36(12):4799–800. 10.1111/jocs.1604534599522MehranRRaoSVBhattDLGibsonCMCaixetaAEikelboomJStandardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the bleeding academic research consortium. Circulation. (2011) 123(23):2736–47. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.00944921670242TsigkasGPapageorgiouAMouliasAKalogeropoulosAPPapageorgopoulouCApostolosADistal or traditional transradial access site for coronary procedures: a single-center, randomized study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. (2022) 15(1):22–32. 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.09.03734922888SrinivasanVMHadleyCCPrablekMLoPrestiMChenSHPetersonECFeasibility and safety of transradial access for pediatric neurointerventions. J Neurointerv Surg. (2020) 12(9):893–6. 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-01583532241922LeeSBChoYJKimSHLeeSChoiYHCheonJE. Transradial cerebral angiography: is it feasible and safe for children?Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. (2022) 45(4):504–9. 10.1007/s00270-022-03070-w35149886RaphaelCKEl Hage ChehadeNAKhabsaJAklEAAouad-MarounMKaddoumR. Ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation in the paediatric population. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2023) 3(3):CD011364. 10.1002/14651858.CD011364.pub336866968AlehaidebAHaWBickfordSDmytriwAABhatiaKAmirabadiACan children be considered for transradial interventions?: prospective study of sonographic radial artery diameters. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. (2020) 13(7):e009251. 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.00925132611203ClaessenBPetersE. Radial access for PCI in acute myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock: underused, underappreciated?JACC Cardiovasc Interv. (2023) 16(12):1529–30. 10.1016/j.jcin.2023.04.04437380236AudisioKHalbreinerMSChadowDGaudinoM. Radial artery or saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass grafting. Trends Cardiovasc Med. (2022) 32(8):479–84. 10.1016/j.tcm.2021.09.00734562573YadavRGerrickensMWMVaesRHDScheltingaMRM. Lower cardiovascular mortality rates in haemodialysis patients with radial artery based fistulas. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. (2021) 62(6):1004–5. 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.08.01234686448HammamiRAbidSJihenJTrikiZBen MradIKammounAPrevention of radial artery occlusion with rivaroxaban after trans-radial access coronary procedures: the RIVARAD multicentric randomized trial. Front Cardiovasc Med. (2023) 10:1160459. 10.3389/fcvm.2023.116045937153470TomeyMITamis-HollandJE. Distal radial artery access: fad or new frontier?JACC Cardiovasc Interv. (2022) 15(22):2312–4. 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.09.04536423975CaiGHuangHLiFShiGYuXYuL. Distal transradial access: a review of the feasibility and safety in cardiovascular angiography and intervention. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. (2020) 20(1):356. 10.1186/s12872-020-01625-832758150SeyhanAUAkR. Ultrasound guidance versus conventional technique for radial artery puncture in septic shock patients: a pilot study. J Vasc Access. (2023) 24(1):133–9. 10.1177/1129729821102329934096389OliveiraMDNavarroECCaixetaA. Distal transradial access for coronary procedures: a prospective cohort of 3,683 all-comers patients from the DISTRACTION registry. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. (2022) 12(2):208–19. 10.21037/cdt-21-54235433348FerranteGCondelloFRaoSVMaurinaMJollySStefaniniGGDistal vs conventional radial access for coronary angiography and/or intervention: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. (2022) 15(22):2297–311. 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.09.00636423974HuZLiuYJiangJHuWOuJTangT. Clinical study of HAIC via left distal radial artery route in the treatment of liver tumors. Minerva Gastroenterol (Torino). (2024) 70(1):128–31. 10.23736/S2724-5985.23.03514-337498122Di GioiaGSalemmeLFerroneMCioppaAPopusoiGPucciarelliACarotid artery stenting using five-French distal radial vascular access. Diagnostics (Basel). (2023) 13(7):1266. 10.3390/diagnostics1307126637046483QiuXLiuJZhangYMaGLiuXBaiCEfficacy and safety of the distal radial artery as an arterial blood sampling site. Respir Care. (2025) 70(9):1134–9. 10.1089/respcare.1256840206024BabuccuOOzdemirHHosnuterMKargiESöğütAAyogluFN. Cross-sectional internal diameters of radial, thoracodorsal, and dorsalis pedis arteries in children: relationship to subject sex, age, and body size. J Reconstr Microsurg. (2006) 22(1):49–52. 10.1055/s-2006-93190716425122ZhaoYChenTYangLMaoWWanYZhangLIs catheterization via distal transradial access feasible in children? From vessel diameter perspective. Front Cardiovasc Med. (2024) 11:1428083. 10.3389/fcvm.2024.142808339156135LinYSunXChenRLiuHPangXChenJFeasibility and safety of the distal transradial artery for coronary diagnostic or interventional catheterization. J Interv Cardiol. (2020) 2020:4794838. 10.1155/2020/479483833380922LeeJWParkSWSonJWAhnSGLeeSH. Real-world experience of the left distal transradial approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: a prospective observational study (LeDRA). EuroIntervention. (2018) 14(9):e995–e1003. 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-0063530222122KangMSParkHBKimSKimIKimDH. Clinical, electrophysiological, and sonographic findings in patients with nerve injury after vessel puncture. J Clin Neurol. (2023) 19(4):371–5. 10.3988/jcn.2022.028537417433FanXZhouTChenTSongRLiFShiGAssessment of the relationship between the distal radial artery and the superficial branch of radial nerve at the anatomic snuffbox using ultrasonography. Can J Cardiol. (2025) 41:2254–63. 10.1016/j.cjca.2025.07.01340680881
Edited by: Lijian Gao, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, China
Reviewed by: Adnan Lakdawala, Washington University in St. Louis, United States