Coronary disease & ACSMeta-analysis
Operator radiation exposure comparing left-radial artery and right-radial artery approaches: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors' conclusion
We recommend that the LRA should be the primary access site for operators in order to reduce ORE in laboratories with standard shielding configurations.
Study context
- Population
- Operators performing cardiac catheterization via left-radial or right-radial artery approachprocedures in 10 studies · LRA 2,410 · RRA 2,758
- Participants
- 5,168 participants
- Comparison
- Operator radiation exposure (ORE) between the LRA and RRA during cardiac catheterization
- LRAn = 2,410
- RRAn = 2,758
Pooled result
Cumulative ORE at the thorax
Ratio of means (ROM)
0.68
95% CI 0.52–0.88
P < 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | ROM (95% CI) | P value |
|---|---|---|
| Cumulative ORE at the left wrist · lower with LRA | 0.64 (0.45–0.93) | P = 0.02 |
| Cumulative ORE at the neck · lower with LRA | 0.68 (0.53–0.86) | P < 0.001 |
| Cumulative ORE at the left eye · did not favor either | 0.83 (0.63–1.11) | P = 0.22 |
Heterogeneity and publication bias
- Possible publication bias for left wrist (Egger test)
- P = 0.02
- Heterogeneity was high for thorax, left eye, and left wrist but not for neck
Original publication
Operator radiation exposure comparing left-radial artery and right-radial artery approaches: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J. Published 25 February 2026. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2026.107385
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it