Radial Hemostasis Devices and Post-Procedural Arterial Occlusion: Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background/Objectives: Radial artery occlusion (RAO) following hemostasis after coronary procedures is the most common complication, with a highly variable incidence (1–33%). While it is well established that the patent hemostasis technique reduces RAO rates, it remains unclear which device should be preferred. The wide variety of available radial hemostasis devices makes it necessary to identify those associated with a lower incidence of complications. Methods: Literature from 2016 to 2021 was reviewed through a systematic search in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Embase databases. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adult patients undergoing percutaneous transradial coronary procedures were included. Devices considered included pneumatic compression devices, manual compression, elastic bandages, and hemostatic dressings. The review process followed PRISMA guidelines. Two random-effects frequentist network meta-analyses were conducted to compare the effects of 16 and 9 radial hemostasis devices on RAO incidence at 24 h and 30 days after the procedure. Results: A total of 17 RCTs were included. The network meta-analysis (NMA) showed a protective effect at the 24 h endpoint for both double-balloon devices and pneumatic compression devices adjusted to mean arterial pressure. At the 30-day endpoint, significant differences were observed among pneumatic compression, chitosan-based PADs, mechanical compression devices, and adjustable elastic bandages. Conclusions: Although some treatments with specific devices significantly differ from the reference treatment, the limited availability of data to assess RAO at 30 days and a certain heterogeneity between devices indicate the need for further investigation.