Safety and Efficacy of Arterial Closure Devices in an Office-Based Angiosuite

We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of 5 arterial closure devices in an outpatient endovascular surgery center. We retrospectively reviewed all cases using femoral arterial access performed between January 2012 and December 2013. Five different arterial closure devices (AngioSeal, Perclose,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of vascular surgery 2018-08, Vol.51, p.10-17
Hauptverfasser: Jones, Lauren E., Yang, Keun Ho, Feldtman, Robert W., Uceda, Pablo V., Ferrara, Craig A., Caruso, Joseph M., Richmond, Jasmine L., Ahn, Samuel S.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of 5 arterial closure devices in an outpatient endovascular surgery center. We retrospectively reviewed all cases using femoral arterial access performed between January 2012 and December 2013. Five different arterial closure devices (AngioSeal, Perclose, StarClose, ExoSeal, and Mynx) were used by 7 endovascular surgeons. All femoral arteries were accessed with 6F sheaths under ultrasound guidance. All patients received systemic anticoagulation with sodium heparin (70 IU/kg). Sheath-shot angiograms of all arterial punctures were taken before deploying closure devices. Device failure was defined as any partial or complete failure requiring additional closure assistance. Minor complication was defined as any event that occurred because of incomplete hemostasis but did not result in hospitalization, including hematoma, hypotension, bleeding, arterial dissection, or extended recovery. Major complication was defined as any event that occurred because of incomplete hemostasis requiring inpatient management. Any device failure was identified per device and per surgeon. Device safety, efficacy, and relationships between other variables were analyzed using a binomial logistic regression. Results with P values 
ISSN:0890-5096
1615-5947
DOI:10.1016/j.avsg.2018.02.011