Pseudoaneurysms after coronary interventions: risk factors, diagnosis, and criteria for surgical treatment

Dimitrije Surla ,
Dimitrije Surla
Contact Dimitrije Surla

Department of Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zemun , Belgrade , Serbia

Marija Nikolić ,
Marija Nikolić

Department of Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zemun , Belgrade , Serbia

Nemanja Trifunović ,
Nemanja Trifunović

Department of Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zemun , Belgrade , Serbia

Dimitrije Surla ,
Dimitrije Surla

Department of Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zemun , Belgrade , Serbia

Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade , Belgrade , Serbia

Dejan Stevanović
Dejan Stevanović

Department of Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zemun , Belgrade , Serbia

Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade , Belgrade , Serbia

Published: 12.11.2025.

Volume 39, Issue 2 (2025)

pp. 66-75;

https://doi.org/10.63696/TMJ202502191

Abstract

Introduction: Pseudoaneurysm (PSA) is defined as a defect in the arterial wall at the puncture site, leading to an extraluminal blood collection surrounded by fibrous tissue, and represents the most common vascular complication after coronary angiography. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for PSA development after coronary interventions and to define criteria for surgical treatment. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 32 patients treated at CHC Zemun over a ten-year period (2012–2022). During the observed period, 16,787 coronary procedures were performed (10,498 coronary angiographies, 6,289 PCIs). The study group included 17 patients with PSA, and 15 patients in the control group with a hematoma that did not progress to PSA. Demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory parameters, therapy, smoking habits, procedural details, and PSA characteristics were recorded, with comparison between surgically and conservatively treated patients. Results: The mean time to PSA diagnosis was 3.29 ± 4.7 days, whereas hematomas were diagnosed within 24 hours. No significant differences in sex or age were observed between groups. More than half of the patients had hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and chronic cardiac or renal diseases. Low hemoglobin, thrombocytopenia, and INR >3 were identified as independent risk factors. Most interventions were performed via the right femoral artery, with PSA most commonly located in the common femoral artery. Median PSA diameter was 44 mm in surgically treated patients and 19 mm in conservatively treated patients. No deaths occurred; the most common postoperative complication was residual hematoma. Conclusion: The first 72 hours after intervention represent the most critical period for PSA detection. PSA diameter is a key factor in therapy selection, lesions >2 cm and complicated ones require surgical intervention, while smaller lesions can be treated conservatively. Timely diagnosis and treatment improve outcomes, and our findings may help optimize patient monitoring protocols and early surgical intervention selection.

Keywords

References

1.
Jeon SH, Kang HG, Kim HJ, Seo MW, Shin BS. Femoral artery pseudoaneurysm after carotid artery stenting: two case reports. *Medicine (Baltimore)*. 2019;98(17).
2.
Michimoto K, Takenaga S, Matsui Y, Enoki K, Nozawa Y, Higuchi T, et al. Risk and prognostic factors of post-catheterization pseudoaneurysm. *Pol J Radiol*. 2021;86:e511–e517.
3.
Wu H, Zhang L, Zhang C, Xie B, Lou C, Liu Y, et al. Non-surgical treatment versus surgery for iatrogenic femoral artery pseudoaneurysms: systematic review and meta-analysis. *Front Surg*. 2022;9(905701).
4.
Stone PA, Campbell JE, AbuRahma AF. Femoral pseudoaneurysms after percutaneous access. *J Vasc Surg*. 2014;60(5):1359–66.
5.
Gupta PN, Salam Basheer A, Sukumaran GG, Padmajan S, Praveen S, Velappan P, et al. Femoral artery pseudoaneurysm as a complication of angioplasty: how can it be prevented? *Heart Asia*. 2013;5(1):144–7.
6.
Sarkadi H, Csőre J, Veres DS, Szegedi N, Molnár L, Gellér L, et al. Incidence of and predisposing factors for pseudoaneurysm formation in a high-volume cardiovascular center. *PLoS One*. 2021;16(8).
7.
Collins N, Wainstein R, Ward M, Bhagwandeen R, Dzavik V. Pseudoaneurysm after transradial cardiac catheterization: case series and review of the literature. *Catheter Cardiovasc Interv*. 2012;80(2):283–7.
8.
Alkagiet S, Petroglou D, Nikas DN, Kolettis TM. Access-site complications of the transradial approach: rare but still there. *Curr Cardiol Rev*. 2021;17(3):279–93.
9.
Sharma R, Patel P, Catanzaro JN. Late massive radial artery pseudoaneurysm following cardiac catheterization: a case report. *Int J Surg Case Rep*. 2021;81(105774).
10.
Senguttuvan NB, Reddy PMK, Shankar P, Abdulkader RS, Yallanki HP, Kumar A, et al. Transradial approach versus trans-femoral approach in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. *PLoS One*. 2022;17(4).
11.
Petrou E, Malakos I, Kampanarou S, Doulas N, Voudris V. Life-threatening rupture of a femoral pseudoaneurysm after cardiac catheterization. *Open Cardiovasc Med J*. 2016;10:201–4.
12.
Tsai TT, Patel UD, Chang TI, Kennedy KF, Masoudi FA, Matheny ME, et al. Contemporary incidence, predictors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: insights from the NCDR Cath-PCI registry. *JACC Cardiovasc Interv*. 2014;7(1):1–9.
13.
Prakash B, Mukhopadhyay S, Singodia P, Shah MM. Radial artery pseudoaneurysm following cardiac catheterization: a case report. *Cureus*. 2021;13(11).
14.
Çakır Ö, Talas Z, Temiz Karadağ D, Durmaz A, Çam İ, Çiftçi E, et al. Risk factors related to the size and volume of femoral artery pseudoaneurysm after catheter angiography: a single-center study. *Turk J Med Sci*. 2021;51(5):2377–82.
15.
Rizk T, Patel D, Dimitri NG, Mansour K, Ramakrishnan V. Iatrogenic arterial perforation during endovascular interventions. *Cureus*. 2020;12(8).
16.
Blanco A, Shayesteh S, Chu LCH, Fishman EK. Radial artery pseudoaneurysm after transradial cardiac catheterization: a case presentation. *Radiol Case Rep*. 2020;15(11):2213–6.
17.
Kosova E, Ricciardi M. Cardiac catheterization. *JAMA*. 2017;317(22).
18.
Kim D, Arbra CA, Simon Ivey J, Burchett P, Gonzalez G, Herrera FA. Iatrogenic radial artery injuries: variable injury patterns, treatment times, and outcomes. 2021;16(1):93–8.

Citation

Copyright

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Most read articles

Partners