Why Radial to Visceral?

Embolization is a highly effective way of controlling bleeding, and is much less invasive than open surgery. Worldwide success rates of 85 percent and higher have been reported in women treated with embolization for uterine fibroids.1 Embolization is much less invasive than conventional open surgery. As a result, there are fewer complications and the hospital stay is relatively brief. Transradial Artery Access (TRA) is proven to reduce associated bleeding and vascular complications. Using TRA, in embolization procedures, conveys proven benefits such as same day discharge opportunities, major bleeding complications reduction, readily accessible and easy to manage access site,  and improved patient satisfaction.3-7


Terumo Interventional systems offers a suite of products designed to meet specific challenges in treating a wide range of visceral diseases. With its radial specific offerings, Terumo provides:

  • Transradial access and closure devices that allow the operators to optimize procedural outcomes while preserving arterial function post-intervention.
  • Wires for navigating through tortuous anatomy and embolics to treat various procedures to improve quality of life.

In addition, Terumo hydrophilic coating helps reduce radial artery spasm,8 allowing the operator to optimize procedural outcomes and patient satisfaction while preserving arterial function.

Learn more about Visceral Procedural Solutions.


Embolization is a procedure that uses particles or coils to block a blood vessel. It may be used to treat some types of liver cancer, kidney cancer, and neuroendocrine tumors. It may also be used to treat uterine fibroids, aneurysms, and other conditions. The different types of embolization are arterial embolization, chemoembolization, and radioembolization.9 Below are a few articles discussing the benefits of radial access for visceral procedures.


  1. https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=cathembol#overview.
  2. Amin A, et al. Costs associated with access site and same-day discharge among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10(4):342-51.
  3. Schussler JM. Effectiveness and safety of transradial artery access for cardiac catheterization. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2011; 24(3):205-209.
  4. Marso S, JAMA. 2010.
  5. Schussler JM. Effectiveness and safety of transradial artery access for cardiac catheterization. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2011; 24(3):205-209.
  6. Duffin DC, Muhlestein JB, Allisson SB, et al. Femoral arterial puncture management after percutaneous coronary procedures: a comparison of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between manual compression and two different vascular closure devices. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001;13(5):354-362.
  7. Valgimigli M, et al. MATRIX Trial. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomized multicenter trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2465-76.
  8. Rathore S. Impact of Length and Hydrophilic Coating of the Introducer Sheath on Radial Artery Spasm During Transradial Coronary Intervention A Randomized Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(5):475-83.
  9. https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/embolization.