Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 172

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Learning Curve for Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Among Operators in the United States: A Study From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry

Open access
Hess, Connie N., Peterson, Eric D., Neely, Megan L., Dai, David, Hillegass, William B., Krucoff, Mitchell W., Kutcher, Michael A., Messenger, John C., Pancholy, Samir, Piana, Robert N., Rao, Sunil V.·2014·Circulation

Abstract

Background—: Adoption of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TRI) in the United States is low and may be related to challenges learning the technique. We examined the relationships between operator TRI volume and procedural metrics and outcomes. Methods and Results—: We used CathPCI Registry data from July 2009 to December 2012 to identify new radial operators, defined by an exclusively femoral percutaneous coronary intervention approach for 6 months after their first percutaneous coronary intervention in the database and ≥15 total TRIs thereafter. Primary outcomes of fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, and procedure success were chosen as markers of technical proficiency. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, bleeding, and vascular complications. Adjusted outcomes were analyzed by using operator TRI experience as a continuous variable with generalized linear mixed models. Among 54 561 TRI procedures performed at 704 sites, 942 operators performed 1 to 10 procedures, 942 operators performed 11 to 50 procedures, 375 operators performed 51 to 100 procedures, and 148 operators performed 101 to 200 procedures. As radial caseload increased, more TRIs were performed in women, in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and for emergency indications. Decreased fluoroscopy time and contrast use were nonlinearly associated with greater operator TRI experience, with faster reductions observed for newer (<30–50 cases) compared with more experienced (>30–50 cases) operators. Procedure success was high, whereas mortality, bleeding, and vascular complications remained low across TRI volumes. Conclusions—: As operator TRI volume increases, higher-risk patients are chosen for TRI. Despite this, operator proficiency improves with greater TRI experience, and safety is maintained. The threshold to overcome the learning curve appears to be approximately 30 to 50 cases.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.113.006356

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 172

Metadata

Authors
Hess, C. N., Peterson, E. D., Neely, M. L., Dai, D., Hillegass, W. B., Krucoff, M. W., Kutcher, M. A., Messenger, J. C., Pancholy, S., Piana, R. N., & Rao, S. V.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2014-06-03
Volume
129
Issue
22
Pages
2277-2286
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2120948153
Cited by
172
References
0
FWCI
17.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Learning Curve for Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Among Operators in the United States: A Study From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.113.006356
The paper
Hess, C. N., Peterson, E. D., Neely, M. L., Dai, D., Hillegass, W. B., Krucoff, M. W., Kutcher, M. A., Messenger, J. C., Pancholy, S., Piana, R. N., & Rao, S. V. (2014). The Learning Curve for Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Among Operators in the United States: A Study From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.113.006356

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.